There have been a few interesting pieces recently, which have taken a different perspective on the question of workplace bullying. Instead of asking how to recognize the behavior when it starts, they look to what causes the conduct in the first place. Toni Bowers, at TechRepublic’s Career Management blog, for example, posted about the nature of power in the workplace and asks whether the first taste of power is addictive enough to turn a perfectly normal colleague into an intolerable bad boss.

For a slightly different take on the question of “why,” the always prophetic marketing guru Guy Kawasaki tells readers how to use the DSM-IV-TR to determine if it’s all in your mind or whether your boss really is crazy.

And, of course, the man leading the Anti-Jerk Revolution, Bob Sutton, has a blog full of insightful posts on the root causes of bullying behavior, as well as answers to the question of how to deal with bullies and save your sanity.

Presumably, the idea would be to switch to a mandatory four-day week, like the Utah example. Federal agencies already have the discretion to implement a compressed schedule agency-wide or on a case-by-case basis. The Federal Employees Flexible and Compressed Work Schedules Act of 1982 (the F&CWS law), authorizes a “versatile and innovative work scheduling program for use in the Federal Government.”

The OPF previously recognized the value of alternative schedules as a way to attract and retain federal employees. In “Negotiating Flexible and Compressed Schedules,” the OPM concluded that alternative schedules will be an important part of the government’s future staffing efforts:

By all accounts, the workforce of tomorrow will be older, more culturally and ethnically diverse, and will consist of more female workers than ever. This diversity will require the Federal Government to utilize new and innovative approaches toward managing human resources and delivering services. To succeed, the Government must successfully compete for skilled workers; and it must be able retain them by providing challenging job opportunities and the flexibility to accommodate family responsibilities and other activities outside work. Flexible and compressed work schedules that are carefully planned and implemented can help make the Government more successful in its recruitment efforts, and more competitive and efficient in the bargaining should be undertaken with the goal of establishing flexible and compressed work schedules that support work and family programs, encourage the participation of employees and management, and also set up administrative controls necessary for the efficient operation of the agency and the success of the established work schedule.

August 31^st is just around the corner so we’ll have to wait to see what the OPM concludes in response to Hoyer’s inquiry. In the meantime, catch up on the four-day workweek trend.

EmployeeScreen IQ Blog has launched the EmployeeScreen University.  As described on the blog, EmployeeScreen Univ. is a "first of its kind interactive, educational Web site for security, risk management and human resource professionals that features regularly updated, free background-screening information; all aimed to help hiring managers make better hiring decisions."  The new site is intended to act as a comprehensive resource for all things related to background checks, references, employee screening, and pre-hire testing. 

Recently, the site has added a few exciting new features, including a Guest Articles section, where you can find articles written from a "unique point of view about background checks and, or other related topics from industry insiders and experts.

Sample of Guest Contributors includes:

• Ron Bower, Vice President and Director of Talent Sourcing at AmTrust Bank on Developing Employee Referral Programs
• Keith Greene, former Vice President of Workforce Readiness at SHRM on developing strong partnerships with background screening organizations
• Michael Sankey, Founder and CEO of BRB Publications on how to search criminal records.

Be sure to bookmark the site for later.  And, in the meantime, you can check out a few of our  most recent posts on background checks and employee screening:

Conclusive Proof that Employers Should Screen Applicants with Social Networking Sites

How to Conduct Online Background Searches With Google

Facebook Users Beware: Employers Aren't the Only Ones Who Know How to Google

Top 10 Reasons Why Employers Should Screen Their Applicants

And the obsession has made for interesting blogging. We’ve talked about Gen Y’s insistence on meeting the arbitrary standards of fashion as they see it, as opposed to the standard of their particular workplaces. We’ve talked about the current status of the lawyer’s dress-code pendulum. We’ve addressed the role of gender when it comes to setting dress-code policies. And we’ve even managed to tackle some specifics of what not to wear to work—including the invasion of the man-short, a personal favorite.

As hard as this might be to believe—I’ve actually happened upon an even more interesting real-life story about dress codes! And it even involves a lawyer, which definitely gets me bonus points in the “tie-it-all-together” category. Judge for yourself. (Via the Legal Profession Blog).

The Arizona attorney at the center of the story was charged by the State’s Bar Counsel with unethical conduct. The lawyer had to answer to a disciplinary committee and defend the misconduct charges filed by the Bar Counsel. The atrocious conduct at issue? The disciplinary charge alleged that the attorney had employed tactics that had no substantial purpose other than delay and embarrassment. He was also alleged to have failed to abstain from “all offensive personality.”

And here’s the conduct that led to these charges. The lawyer, who was admitted to the Arizona State bar in 1999, and who practices criminal defense, went to a police station to informally interview two police officers involved in a vehicular-manslaughter case. When he arrived at the station, he was wearing a t-shirt that had “Let the f***ing” printed across the front. [Asterisks not included].  He wore the t-shirt to communicate his opinion that his client was at a disadvantage in the judicial system by virtue of the police conduct.” Neither officer commented on the attorney’s fashion choice.

A prosecutor was also present during the visit. She testified that she was not offended or embarrassed by the shirt. She believed that he’d donned the shirt in an attempt to be funny; although she did think that it was a bit inappropriate. Her supervisor, on the other hand, did not find humor in the shirt or with the attorney wearing it. He ordered security officers to take pictures of the shirt.

And, perhaps to ensure that he wouldn’t be invited to the Maricopa County P.D.’s holiday party, he told another prosecutor that her boss was an “unethical piece of trash.” He made the comment in response to a request for a transcript. He provided the requesting prosecutor the transcript without delay or inconvenience.

Then, in an exercise of the holiday, gift-giving spirit, the attorney later sent a note to the Chief Attorney in the Vehicular Crimes Bureau, enclosing a small gift. The note read, “Kristen, your waiting room magazines required a better selection.” Enclosed was a six-month gift subscription to Modern Drunkard Magazine. The Chief received monthly issues of the magazine as promised but did not put them in the waiting room. She felt it may be inappropriate, given she was the head of the office that prosecuted drunk-driving cases. She did appreciate the humor, though, and was not embarrassed or otherwise imposed upon as a result of the “gift.”

If you are confused as to how these three incidents could rise to the level of sanctionable conduct, you are in good company. The hearing officer recommended that the charges be dismissed in their entirety—the first time in his 25-year tenure that he had made such a recommendation. Maybe the conduct was inappropriate or in poor taste. But maybe not—given the evidence that the intended recipients of his less-than-subtle messages were not offended or embarrassed. Either way, the hearing officer wrote, “on the continuum of inappropriate to unprofessional to unethical,” the attorney’s conduct could be described, at the worst, as inappropriate.

There are some fundamental questions to consider before deciding to convert to a compressed-schedule workweek. Executive management will want to know the answers to these questions, as well, so it’s best to consider them in advance. If you feel comfortable with each of the issues below, then you are likely able to sufficiently design a workable policy.

Defining Purpose

What is the purpose of offering a compressed workweek? Is it because of the organization’s emphasis on work-life balance? To help employees bear the increased burden of the costly commute? Is the focus on the reduction of energy consumption and the desire to reduce the company’s carbon footprint? Or is it an innovative approach to increased productivity and efficiency?

Outlining the Scope

What is the basic offering of the program? In other words, what is a “compressed workweek”? Currently, the four-day, ten-hour-per-day option is most popular. But that’s not the only option. There is the 3-day, 12-hours-per-day option, or the 80-hour-per-9-days alternative.

Also, is this a trial program intended to last on a temporary or probationary basis? Or is this the “real deal,” intended to be a long-lasting option for future employees?

Determining Eligibility

Who is eligible to apply for a compressed workweek schedule? Is the option available to full-time and part-time employees? Is there a minimum length of employment that must be completed before the option becomes available? All job positions and pay grades? All facilities or only certain facilities? Is there a limited number of persons per unit or department that will be permitted to switch to a compressed schedule, after which, no requests will be granted? Can employees combine a compressed workweek with other flexible arrangements, such as telecommuting or job-sharing?

Submitting a Request

How should an employee go about making a request for a compressed workweek? (See 5 Steps Toward a More Flexible Workplace for details on ways to make the request-submission process most effective). How will requests be considered? Is there any preferential consideration given to employees with more seniority, for example? Or with the best performance evaluations? What factors might prevent an otherwise eligible employee’s request from being granted? Operational factors? Workload? Performance history?

Impact on Compensation and Benefits

How will holidays be compensated when they fall on the employees’ normally scheduled day off? If a holiday falls on a normally scheduled workday, will the employee be paid for 8 hours or 10?

Terminating the Program

What if an employee desires to return to a “traditional” schedule? Is there a process that must be followed? Is this considered a request for permission or is it awarded as a matter of right without any “permission” being awarded? How much notice will be required? And what if the employer needs to terminate the program? What are the conditions that could cause this to occur?

Reviewing the Success of the Program

How often will the program be reviewed? Will it be reviewed on a company-wide basis or just on an individual level? Will the employee be involved in the review process? What about the employee’s team members? What factors will be considered?

Previous Posts on Alternative Schedules and Compressed Work Weeks

Should a Four-Day Work Week Be Mandatory*

It's Saturday Today in Utah: 4 Day Work Week

Alternatives to the Four Day Work Week

Popularity of the 4-day Week Continues to Grow

Will Four-Day School Week Push the Four-Day Work Week Trend?

Utah's Mandatory 4-Day Work Week Will Save the World. Sort of.

I Hate To Say "I Told You So"–The 4-Day Workweek Is a Hot Topic

1. regularly supervises two or more other employees, and
2. has management as the primary duty of the position, and
3. has some genuine input into the job status of other employees (such as hiring, firing, promotions, or assignments); and
4. is paid a salary of no less than $455 per week.

"Management" means just what you'd probably guess it to mean.  Managerial activities include:

• interviewing, selecting, and training of employees;
• setting and adjusting their rates of pay and hours of work;
• directing the work of employees; maintaining production or sales records for use in supervision or control;
• appraising employees’ productivity and efficiency for the purpose of recommending promotions or other changes in status; handling employee complaints and grievances;
• disciplining employees; planning the work; determining the techniques to be used;
• apportioning the work among the employees; determining the type of materials, supplies, machinery, equipment or tools to be used or merchandise to be bought, stocked and sold;
• controlling the flow and distribution of materials or merchandise and supplies;
• providing for the safety and security of the employees or the property;
• planning and controlling the budget; and monitoring or implementing legal compliance measures. 

Also included, . . .

Under a special rule for business owners, an employee who owns at least a bona fide 20% equity interest of the organization, regardless of its formal legal structure (e.g., corporation, partnership, or other), and who is actively engaged in its management, also is considered a bona fide exempt executive.

Highly compensated employees performing office or non-manual work and paid total annual compensation of $100,000 or more (which must include at least $455 per week paid on a salary or fee basis) are exempt from the FLSA if they customarily and regularly perform at least one of the duties of an exempt executive, administrative or professional employee identified in the standard tests for exemption.

Not feeling so confident about your understanding of the FLSA? Our full-day FLSA seminar on November 14 might be exactly what you need to master the challenging world of wage-and-hour compliance.

We’ve previously posted on Barack Obama’s position on women’s and work-life balance issues. What kind of work-and-family experience has Joe Biden had, both in his personal life and as a policy maker?

The Wall Street Journal’s blog “The Juggle” noted Biden’s personal family tragedy: the 1972 car accident which killed his wife and infant daughter and left his two sons badly injured. To care for them while continuing his political career, he commuted daily by train between Wilmington, Del., and Washington, never securing a Washington residence.

As Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1991, some alleged that he was too easy on Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas and too hard on Anita Hill, a former co-worker of Thomas' who had accused the federal judge of sexual harassment. Some even maintain that "he very self-consciously tried to shore up his support from women voters after the Anita Hill episode."

Although Biden is perhaps best known for his focus on foreign policy, he has also had a hand in legislation targeting work-and-family issues. According to a cached version of Biden’s senatorial campaign Website (which since this weekend has automatically referred visitors to the Obama-Biden campaign site), the Senator is a co-sponsor of the Healthy Families Act, which would require employers with more than 15 employees to offer seven paid sick days a year. In the 1990s, he was the primary sponsor of the Violence Against Women Act and supported the Family and Medical Leave Act, which guarantees workers up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to care for a family member.

Mendte admitted that he viewed hundreds of e-mails after installing a keystroke-tracking software on her computer at work.  Lane maintains that she complained about the possibility that her e-mails were being leaked but her employer, KYW-TV, "treated her as if she was paranoid."  Lane claims that her career has been ruined as a result of Mendte's behavior.

As of yet, though, I am still on the fence. I can’t say I’m opposed to the idea. But I do have substantial doubts about the benefits of a longer workday. I also have concerns about the impact the shortened workweek will have on access to public services—especially by those who are in the most serious need of that access.

But, all of those questions aside, I can’t help but recognize the enthusiasm some have expressed at the idea of a Friday-free workweek. (Hopefully I’ll be a bit more firm in my opinion by September 16, 2008, when I’ll be presenting an audioconference with Rex L. Facer, Plan & Implement Your 4-day Work Week). For employers who are not quite convinced that a four-day workweek is a magic cure-all, it may be helpful to review some of the positive benefits that are said to result from the shortened work week. Here are of the “pros” from my Pros and Cons List on the topic. These might give you a start in evaluating whether such a program is a good fit for your workplace.

1. Reduced fuel costs. Employees would have to endure the dreaded commute one less day each week, thereby saving money at the pump with reduced fuel consumption.
2. Decreased absenteeism. On a five-day schedule, employees are forced to cram their two days off with personal errands, chores, soccer games, and social outings. By the time Monday comes around, there hasn’t been a minute of rest and employees are just plum beat. So they call out of work. This wouldn’t happen so frequently if employees had a third day to accomplish the work they have to do outside of work.
3. Increased productivity. It’s a well-established principle of productivity that workers become less efficient where no deadline looms. That’s why we’re more efficient in the week before vacation—we know we have to get it done by the time we leave. The same idea is transferable to a shortened workweek. Employees are least productive on Fridays so why not just eliminate them altogether?
4. Improved job satisfaction and morale. Satisfaction with what goes on in the workplace may be tied to what goes on outside of the workplace. Employees who spend more time with family and friends, who have the flexibility of three days off, will return to work refreshed, and generally less hostile to their employer.
5. Reduced personnel turnover. Not surprisingly, #4 leads to #5. Happier employees tend to leave less often. If they like the job, they’re more likely to stick around.
6. Reduced energy costs. By closing for three, instead of two, days each week, employers stand to recognize substantial energy costs. These costs can be significant where the schedule will actually permit the employer to close an entire facility for an additional day.
7. Improved work-life balance. As a result of the added day, employees who work a four-day week will have more time to spend with their families and friends.
8. Reduced traffic congestion. This potential effect may be seen largely on Fridays, which is the day most employers are converting to a non-working day.

It could be the always-chipper Janet from Food Service--what's she got to be so happy about, anyway?  Or maybe Chad the Summer Intern, in his daily uniform of light-colored khaki pants, light blue, long-sleeved shirt, cuffs rolled, of course, and one of the four ties he's currently got in rotation.  Chad is powerless, really, and too concerned with making a stellar impression to sound like a whiner if he were to complain about the snide, jabbing comments of the bitter employee.  You know who they are. 

And so do they.  Just ask The Angry Receptionist.  She's working very hard--though not at her job duties.  Instead, she has blogged her way to the top of the disengaged-employee list by branding herself as the champion of bitter employees everywhere.  In her words:

I'm a receptionist at a mid-sized corporate office. When I first started here, I was very nice. It took about a week for everyone to try to take advantage of my good will in every awful way possible.
I'm not nice anymore.

And she's good at what she does.  Her blog has attracted lots of attention in the blogosphere. She is fully committed to her efforts, too.  In fact, she has all of the qualities of a potentially outstanding employee.  Except that she holds her cards too long.  If the workplace is as dreadful as she describes, why is she there?  You've gotta' know when to fold 'em, you know? 

For more on the impact of employees blogging at work or about work, see Blogs In the Workplace

Fat employees, beware. The State of Alabama has issued an official “crackdown” on unfit employees. That’s right. The state has issued a get-fit mandate. Employees have one year to “see the light,” so to speak. Either get moving towards thin or face a bulging health-care premium. Employees who fail to trim their waistlines will pay $25 a month for insurance that will be free to their leaner coworkers.

Alabama is the first state that has elected a “stick” approach to motivating employees to get healthy. There are a few states that offer rewards (i.e., carrots), to employees who make healthy lifestyle changes. Like many other employers, both public and private, Alabama already charges a premium to employees who smoke.

So what exactly is required? According to the New York Times article, Extra Pounds Means Insurance Fees for Ala. Workers, beginning in January 2010, state workers will be required to undergo health screenings—or face a monetary penalty if they refuse. If the screening reveals problems with blood pressure, cholesterol, or obesity, they are given one year to shape up or ship out. At a follow-up screening after twelve months, they won’t face the $25 charge.

And what will qualify employees for a passing grade when they take the screening test next year? Employees with a Body Mass Index (BMI) lower than 34 will be exempt from the “obesity charge.” A BMI of 30 is considered the threshold for obesity. And if you fail the screening? Other than being required to “make progress,” the State has not yet determined exactly how “progress” will be defined.

Maybe the most obvious question is just how the State of Alabama thinks that its out-of-shape employees, many of whom have been battling their weight, cholesterol, or other health issues for years, will suddenly develop the motivation, knowledge, and skills to make these changes. Deeply rooted lifestyle changes are not made because of an HR initiative.

If I sound cynical, it’s because I am. When employers stopped hiring smokers and charging employees who smoked, I was skeptical. Although there are obvious and undisputable benefits to a tobacco-free workforce, I worried that the proffered motivation was a bit too “glossy” to be true.

I also wondered how long it would be until there weren’t enough smokers left to make them a valuable target. At that point, what group would be the next to be targeted? I suspected it would be obese or overweight employees. It seems my prediction has come to fruition. At least for overweight government employees in a state where 30.3% of citizens are obese.

One of the concerns that was raised with the E-Verify program was its potential effect on discrimination in the workplace.  If, as a result of using E-Verify, an employer receives a no-match letter or a “tentative” no-match letter, he cannot terminate the employee without first trying to resolve the mismatch.  Failure to work with the employee to determine the cause of the mismatch could result in a claim for national-origin discrimination.

Anticipating the likelihood that employers would not want to engage in the additional steps of “working with the employee,” the DOJ issued guidelines outlining the step that an employer must take upon receiving information about a potential mismatch.  (See Antidiscrimination Guidance Concerning the DHS No-Match Rule).

See also:  E-Verify Employer Dos & Don'ts

There are several ways to ensure that you don’t lose the positive benefits of your initiative as a result of disorganization or poor planning when accepting these requests. Here are five of the fundamental characteristics of a start-up flexibility program.

1. Outline a formal business-proposal approach. Require employees to submit a proposal describing their request. Have them clearly define the logistics of their proposed work arrangement, including how they will complete their work, how they will monitor and safeguard their productivity levels, and how their request would impact other aspects of the business, both negatively and positively. Communicate these requirements to all employees—don’t wait until you are approached with a request. If everyone knows what is required, you don’t risk dissuading some deserving employees who are intimidated by the unknown.

2. Create a specific review mechanism. All requests should be reviewed as a matter of course. Even if they are not likely to be implemented, every request for flexibility should be reviewed in the same manner. This will prevent complaints about favoritism and inequality. This is particularly important for the employee whose request is granted so she is not ostracized by others whose requests were denied.

3. Take it slow. As a matter of policy, implement any new flexible arrangement only on a temporary, trial basis. Communicate that the testing period will last six months and establish checkpoints for review and re-assessment throughout the trial period. As with any work arrangement, success is viable only where everyone knows what to expect from others and what will be expected of them. Will the employee be required to attend the monthly team meeting, which is held on Fridays, when her new arrangement has her working from home on Fridays? Any agreement will be successful only to the extent that all parties get what they bargained for.

4. Make it a team process. Take the proposal to the employee’s team members. Preferably, the employee can present her ideas to her coworkers and solicit feedback and suggestions individually. Using that feedback, she can tweak her proposal and present it again, this time with any feedback and suggestions going directly to decision makers.

5. Remember that this is a custom fit. Employees who have not demonstrated self-sufficiency and initiative should not necessarily be the first to receive special work arrangements. If an employee traditionally has been undependable or has required more hands-on management and coaching, then the flexible arrangement may not be a good fit. Be sure to consider the individual’s demonstrated work habits when customizing an alternative work arrangement.

Working Mothers Magazine published its list of the 50 Best Law Firms for Women, which acknowledges firms working hard to retain female attorneys.  Flexible work schedules are the most common initiative but not the only one.  These firms host networking groups for female lawyers, have formal mentoring programs for senior female associates, and provide management training--all with the goal of helping make more women reach partnership. 

The winning features of each of the firms are listed in this article (pdf): 

Tackett, 25, posted a video to his MySpace page, showing him taking a "bath" in the sink.  The sink, though, was in his employer's restaurant at the time he bathed in it.  In the nearly four-minute video, "Mr. Unstable" is seen bathing in a bubble-filled utility sink at the Burger King in Xenia, Ohio, where he had been employed.  Predictably, Tackett and four to five other employees on the midnight shift were terminated days after the video was posted.

So what's the take-away lesson from this unappetizing story? 

First, this is a lesson to our Gen Y friends and coworkers--yes, we mean it when we say that your social-networking escapades are not as private as you think. 

Second, these fiascos not only might prevent you from getting hired but also can get you fired if your employer learns of off-duty conduct that turns its corporate stomach. 

Third, this should serve as a poignant example of why employers must be knowledgeable with Web 2.0.  Your employees are online.  Employers, you need to be online, too. 

{There's no more excuses that you "don't know how" to use the social networking sites.  Just watch the step-by-step video tutorial, How to Set Up a Facebook Account for Applicant Screening}