Giving employees some tips on whom to refer will help you increase the quality of your candidates. Here are some reasons to think twice about making a referral, courtesy of Katherine Spencer Lee, a Computerworld columnist:

1. Personal relationships might suffer. Everyone knows you don’t always get along with co-workers. But even people you used to like can get on your nerves when you spend more than 40 hours a week together — especially if friends start to expect favorable treatment. Solution: Try to avoid referring close personal contacts and stick to people you’ve already worked with — they’re usually the best referrals anyway.
2. They might get mad if they don’t get a job. Obviously, not everyone who’s referred can always be hired. That can lead to resentment if you exaggerate their chances. Solution: Don’t overstate your influence and remind referrals that your good word is no guarantee.
3. You don’t always know everything. Another common mistake is referring people because of personality traits while ignoring other relevant factors like prior experience. Solution: Employees should know a little about how to “play recruiter” and find out enough about someone’s background to make a solid recommendation.

Hiring missteps: They cost companies a lot of time and money — and in the end, create a lot of extra work for HR. Here’s some help for guiding managers to make the best hiring decisions possible.

No manager’s going to make the right decision 100% of the time. But avoiding these common mistakes will help them increase the odds:

At the start of the process

The recruiting effort should start with a good job description and decent pool of candidates. Without those, you’re likely to end up hiring the wrong person. Here are two manager mistakes that can get in the way:

• Requirements are too narrow. It’s a common mistake for a manager to list too many “requirements,” or focus too much on the less-important criteria. Often, too much emphasis is placed on skills that can be taught quickly in on-the-job training anyway — as long as the candidate is a good learner and can adapt quickly.
• They don’t help HR prep the candidates. Since HR managers or recruiters are generally the first people to talk to applicants, it’s usually up to them to tell candidates what they need to know before the interview. Make sure you ask hiring managers if there’s any important information you should pass on to help the candidate prepare. That’ll make sure the interview time is well spent.

During the interview

Given how subjective the art of interviewing can be, it’s no surprise a lot of faulty decisions are made based on a candidate’s interview. Still, there are ways managers can get more out of the process.

Some common interview mistakes you can help them avoid:

• They give first impressions all the weight. Obviously, first impressions are important and will always make a difference. But too often, managers make a decision immediately and won’t be swayed either way, no matter how great — or awful — the rest of the interview is.
• They go too easy on people. A common mistake people without much interviewing experience make is speaking up during long periods of silence. Usually, the manager asks a tough question, the candidate pauses for too long to think of an answer, so the manager jumps in and lobs a softball question or gives a hint on how to answer. But managers need to learn to use silence to their advantage and wait to hear what the candidate has to say.

When the decision’s made

Here are two more behaviors that can lead to the job offer being handed to wrong person:

• Candidates are only rated comparatively. After seeing a few obvious duds, the next mediocre candidate that walks in the door might seem like your next superstar. But that doesn’t mean he or she is the best choice, or even a good choice. It’s important for managers to have established criteria and hold off on the offer until they find someone that really meets them.
• The decision takes too long. Granted, the manager should never rush into a decision. But if the process takes too long, the best candidates are more likely to accept other offers or decide to stick with their current employers.

Some companies are saying yes, according to a story in the Hartford Courant. After seeing employees quit because getting to work became too expensive, some employers have added a short commute to their lists of hiring criteria.

What are recruiters and hiring managers doing? Some are refusing to hire anyone who lives outside a certain radius, while others are requiring applicants to make a trial commute before accepting an offer.

Is this a smart idea? It’s true some employees have started looking for jobs closer to home, but does that mean you shouldn’t consider talent just because you think they might find a reason to quit?

What do you think? Have you changed any of your recruiting practices due to high fuel prices? Let us know by dropping us a comment.

Yes: 46%

No: 38%

We don’t have part-timers: 16%

Those that offer benefits typically don’t spend as much on them as they do with full-time staff. The most common benefits offered are 401k eligibility and paid vacation. Health and disability insurance are less common.

Should your compensation package for part-time workers include benefits? Maybe. If less than half of your competitors are doing it, then it may or may not make a difference. But some low-cost offerings could be enough to push you over the top.

Do you give benefits to part-timers? If so, what do you offer? Has it helped you recruit? Let us know in the comments section.

That’s the conclusion of a recent BusinessWeek article, which lists some anecdotal evidence about the trouble with background checks.

One story involved a former pharmacy employee who was fired for stealing. An unemployment compensation board ruled that he was wrongly accused — but the company had already given his name to a database that tracks employee thefts.

Since then, the man has been unable to find a decent job, the story says.

Worth the risk?

Given the rising revenues for background check firms, it’s clear many companies think the risk of inaccuracy is worth it to screen out workers who might steal or harm the business in other ways. Also, statistically speaking, problems appear to be rare.

We’d like to hear from you. Do you rely on an outside firm to conduct background screens? Ever had any problems? Let us know in the comments section.

Answer: a four-day workweek.

As gas continues to rise above $4 a gallon, many employers are letting folks work four 10-hour days instead of the traditional five.

The benefit to employees is obvious: Skipping a day of work saves them 20% of their commuting costs. That’s a great benefit that helps recruiting and retention rates — without much cost for the employer.

The Monday-Thursday schedule can cause some problems, though. For companies considering compressing work schedules, here are some things to consider:

• Complaints — A lot of companies will still need to have some bodies in the seats on Fridays. That can cause a problem if everyone wants the new schedule. You can try revolving the day the employees get off, so the workplace stays evenly staffed throughout the week.
• Lost productivity — Employees won’t necessarily get as much done in four long days as they can in five normal days. Managers will need to pay close attention to performance when the program begins.
• Burnout — Some employees might overestimate their ability to work extra long days.

One option for firms reluctant to dive into the four-day week: alternating between five- and four-day weeks, extending the days so 80 hours are worked over two weeks’ time.

An African-American man applied for a job. Based on his experience, he was brought in to interview. He was turned down in favor of a white applicant. He sued for race discrimination — and won.

Why? Most of the evidence against the company came in the way interviewees were evaluated. All candidates were asked the same questions, but the way the answers were scored was highly subjective.

Each answer was graded on a point system, but there didn’t seem to be a set formula for how points were awarded. For example, when asked about his attendance record, the man said he’d only ever missed a few days due to illness. A white applicant gave nearly the same answer, but got a much higher score.

The judge ruled that the subjective grading system was a cover for the hiring manager’s bias.

The company made the right choice by keeping the interview questions similar for all applicants — but didn’t carry the consistency through to the scoring.

Cite: Dunlap v. Tennessee Valley Authority

A man applied for a job at Disney World playing trumpet in the park’s annual Christmas show. As a practicioner of the Sikh religion, he was required to wear a Turbin and keep a full beard.

He was turned down for the job and told he didn’t have “the Disney look.” So he filed a lawsuit, claiming religious discrimination.

Experts aren’t sure what chance Disney has of fighting the suit. On one hand, the company might have a case if it can show he couldn’t have been hired because he was unable to follow the position’s strict uniform guidelines.

But on the other hand, commenting on an applicant’s “look” is rarely a good idea. We’ll keep you posted as the case moves forward.

As gas prices are rising, about 30% of employees admit they’ve started looking for new jobs closer to home, says a recent survey by Robert Half International.

Because of that, some companies have started offering employees and candidates more flexible arrangements. According to the survey:

• 18% of companies have increased mileage reimbursements for business travel
• 17% have started using ride sharing services, and
• 11% have started letting workers telecommute.

Based on those numbers, it looks like employers might not be doing enough to keep employees satisfied as gas prices rise.

To hang on to the 30% of folks who are thinking about changing jobs, some employers might need to make more substantial changes.

What’s the best solution? Ask employees what they want from you. Have managers find out ways their commuting woes might be eased and explore those options.

Tell us: What have you done to ease the pain? Has it made a difference in retention and satisfaction? Let us know in the comments section.

When hiring managers find a really desirable candidate, they often feel pressured to “sell” the job to make sure the offer’s accepted. But here’s one who went too far — and got his company dragged into court.

A woman was hired for a part-time job with the company. During the interview, the hiring manager told her she’d be given the same benefits as a full-time employee. Also, when she was offered the job, she was given a document summarizing the benefits offered to full-time employees.

But on her first day of work, she learned that part-timers weren’t eligible for full benefits. When she complained to Human Resources, she was given a list of what she would receive. The HR manager told her the manager’s comments and the written document were “honest mistakes.”

She didn’t think so, and she sued the company.

The court ruled in her favor. The judge said the company made a promise to her — in person and in writing — which convinced the woman to switch jobs, then backed down on the promise to her detriment (Cite: Timpe v. WATG Holdings, Inc.).

Avoid ‘truth-in-hiring’ lawsuits

In addition to giving the wrong info about pay and benefits, mistakes hiring managers make when trying to sell positions include:

• exaggerating how quickly someone will get promoted
• lying about financial difficulties or impending layoffs in the candidate’s department, and
• inflating a job’s potential for bonuses and commissions.

Those mistakes can often lead to lawsuits, as in the case above. Other times, they create a serious retention problem once new hires realize they aren’t getting what they expected.

Here are some steps Human Resources pros can take to help their companies avoid those problems:

• Put a disclaimer or at-will language in your offer letters. Don’t write anything too harsh, or it will make the candidate uneasy — just something that makes it clear the person is being hired for an at-will position and the terms of the offer are subject to change.
• Save talk about benefits and compensation for the written offer letter.
• Remind managers that if the truth can’t convince a candidate to accept an offer, that person probably isn’t a good fit.