IN THIS ISSUE:

 


 

How new legislation effects employers with 50 or more employees

PLUS:

 

 

 

Welcome to our End-of-Summer 2009 edition of our e-newsletter, RESOURCES. We are excited to produce this exciting forum for the communication of issues pertinent and relevant to HR Professionals.

 

We hope you enjoy the newsletter. It can only get better with your input and comments. If you have any articles for inclusion, comments or requests, please email them to Barry Lippold with the subject: "Resources Article" to: blippold@marcison.com.

 

 

 


 

Best Places to Work in Southern Nevada (sm) 2009-

Surviving Tough Economic Times
Q&A with Four of our Board Members

 

In anticipation of our upcoming awards luncheon, we sat down with some of our distinguished Board Members to discuss the new focus of Best Places to Work in Southern Nevada (sm) for 2009:

Our Best Places to Work Q&A Panel are:

Bud Pierce, President
Cynthia Dobek, Treasurer and BPTW Co-Chair
Patrice Ross, Incoming President and BPTW Co-Chair
Carol Herrington, Past President

 

Hello all! Well, let's just start this off with the most important issue at hand...Best Places to Work has a new focus this year. Can you tell us about it?

We had to take a long view on the event for this year due to the economy, recognizing that it was still an important function for SNHRA to provide a way for its member and non-member organizations to celebrate their best practices in Human Resources when it come to being named as a Best Place To Work.

It is SNHRA’s goal to recognize organizations that are working hard not only to survive, but to continue to provide for their employees…Even if survival means they are going through changes such as downsizing. In times like these, downsizing doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s a bad company. We're evaluating how changes are implemented. There is a balance to being sensitive to the needs of the company while still being sensitive to the needs of the employees.

 

 

I know that we've heard that the SNHRA membership has been a little confused about all of the mixed messages in the media about BPTW this year. Can you set the record straight?
SNHRA has been honoring companies with our Best Places to Work in Southern Nevada (sm) awards since 2002. As an organization focused on the practice of human resources, SNHRA originally started this program with the purpose of recognizing those companies with outstanding people policies.

This year we approached our previous media to again sponsor this year's event, but they declined and decided to go ahead with an event with the same name and that will be held in the same month as our event! This has been confusing for both our members and the public at large. We assure you that SNHRA was the originator of this program in Southern Nevada and we will continue to reward organizations with outstanding HR practices.

 

 

Most of our long-time members and guests know that this awards program was originated in Southern Nevada by SNHRA. How is SNHRA's original version of this awards program different than the other workplace awards programs out there?

We are their non-profit association that recognizes HR professionals and their CEO’s for implementing best practices in HR for employees. Our program allows the Human Capital of an organization to decide that recognition of their employer is merited. Our awards program has always been about HR professionals recognizing companies for their outstanding HR practices. Who better to judge HR practices than those who work in the field on a daily basis?

 

 

How is the Board helping to ease the cost of attending the awards in this difficult economy?

Recognizing that times are tough we went into “Survivor” mode ourselves because we wanted the event to still be a success and were concerned that our participants would be unable to attend at previous cost levels. So, we scaled back the event a little to save on the cost of putting on the event. So, the cost of attending the luncheon this year is only $35, or a table of 10 for $350. We wanted to ensure that representatives from companies and HR professionals alike could all join together to celebrate and honor those companies that are doing what they can to put their people first.

 


What about the availability of sponsorships?

We still have a limited number of sponsorships available at the event, at the lowest entry points since the beginning of our Best Places awards eight years ago.  We have sponsorships currently available from $750 - $1500 that provide your company inexpensive and powerful exposure to some of the best companies and decision makers in the Valley!  Please contact Barry Lippold @ Marc Ison for more information:  Admin@snhra.org or 702-281-6528.


 

When do nominations close?

Nominations for Best Places to Work 2009 have already come to a close. Congratulations to all of our Nominated Companies!

 


How does a company apply?

Step 1:

Employees nominate their companies during our "Call for Nominations".

 

Step 2:

Companies complete our online Awards Entry Form. 

 


What is the deadline for applications?

September 9, 2009



Announcing Our Best Places to Work Event Sponsor



---

A warm set of "Thank you's" goes out to our Board, our Chapter Administration and to our Best Places to Work Co-Chairs for all of their hard work and for contributing to this most informative Q&A about our program this year.



By: Patrick H. Hicks and Jeanine Navarro. Patrick H. Hicks is the Founding Shareholder of Littler Mendelson’s Las Vegas and Reno offices. He can be reached at phicks@littler.com. Jeanine Navarro is an Associate in Littler Mendelson’s Las Vegas office. She can be reached at jnavarro@littler.com.

Ranting on the Internet about one's employer has become commonplace. When complaints are posted on a publicly accessible Internet page, employers have the same right as anyone in the general public to access the posting, and, except in limited circumstances, can take adverse action based on the posting's content.

 

As the Hillstone Restaurant Group, owner of the Houston's restaurant chain, recently learned after an adverse jury verdict, employers who access a restricted social networking site without proper authorization face potentially significant exposure under federal and state laws intended to protect personal privacy. With employees becoming increasingly sophisticated about using privacy settings to control access to their personal social networking pages, this risk will become only more significant over time.

 

Employer Accessed A Restricted Rant Site and Fired the Site's Leaders

 

Houston’s employee Brian Pietrylo established a group on MySpace, called "The Spec- Tator," with the stated purpose of "vent[ing] about any BS we deal with at work without any outside eyes spying in on us." In his opening post, Pietrylo explained that the group was "entirely private and [could] only be joined by invitation." He then urged group members to "let the s**t talking begin." Pietrylo's coworkers, including his co-plaintiff Doreen Marino, took Pietrylo at his word. Over time, Pietrylo, Marino, and their colleagues posted sexual remarks about the restaurant's management and customers, jokes about standards for customer service and quality, and references to violence and illegal drug use.

 

Karen St. Jean, a Houston’s greeter and authorized rant group member, showed The Spec-Tator to a manager while dining at the manager's home. Subsequently, another Houston's manager asked St. Jean for her password, and St. Jean provided it. This manager and a regional supervisor of operations separately accessed the site. St. Jean testified at her deposition that she did not believe that she would be fired if she had refused the request for her password, but she did think she "would have gotten in some sort of trouble." She also testified that she is "not good under pressure." She admitted thinking that other managers would access The Spec-Tator once she gave her password to one of the restaurant's managers.

 

Pietrylo testified at his deposition that he viewed the site's content as "just joking." The restaurant’s management, however, did not find the site's content to be funny. The regional supervisor who viewed The Spec-Tator testified that he considered its content to be adverse to Houston's four core values of professionalism, positive mental attitude, aim to please, and teamwork. The regional supervisor terminated Pietrylo and Marino.

 

Proceedings in the Trial Court

 

In their lawsuit against Houston's owner, Pietrylo and Marino alleged violations of the federal Stored Communications Act and invasion of privacy, among other claims. The federal statute prohibits unauthorized access to electronic communications, such as Internet postings, stored at an electronic communications provider, a term that includes Web hosts such as MySpace, Facebook, and LinkedIn. The Act does not prohibit access that is "authorized ... by a user of the service with respect to a communication intended for the user." Similarly, under New Jersey law, consent is a defense to a claim for invasion of privacy.

 

In the summary judgment proceedings, Houston's contended that it had no liability on either claim because St. Jean indisputably had authorized management's access to The Spec-Tator by disclosing her password in response to management's request. The district court rejected this contention, reasoning that St. Jean's deposition testimony created a factual dispute over whether she had freely given her consent. The court noted that "there is a dearth of authority regarding what it means for consent to be freely given." The court itself, however, did not establish a standard. The court merely concluded that St. Jean's deposition testimony regarding her concern over a potentially adverse employment action had she not disclosed her password created a factual dispute that required a jury trial to resolve the question whether St. Jean had freely given her consent.

 

The jury returned a verdict against Houston's on both the federal Stored Communications Act claim and the invasion of privacy claim. The jury awarded each plaintiff the maximum backpay that could be awarded — $903 for Marino and $2,500 for Pietrylo, both of whom had quickly found new jobs after Houston's fired them. The jury also found that Houston's had acted maliciously, i.e., had engaged in "intentional wrongdoing in the sense of an evil-minded act." That finding entitled plaintiffs to an award of punitive damages, which the parties had agreed before trial would equal four times any actual damages awarded. The actual damages awarded also triggered the Stored Communications Act's right of an aggrieved party to recover attorneys' fees.

 

Lessons Learned

 

The jury's verdict demonstrates that employers should tread with caution when accessing an employee's restricted web page. In light of the common assumption that subordinate employees may perceive some element of pressure when asked to respond to management's requests, and in the absence of settled authority addressing when a user's consent is valid under the federal Stored Communications Act, employers should consider the following course of action when confronted with the need to access a restricted Web site.

 

First, carefully evaluate the degree of necessity and forego access when the need does not justify the risk. Second, document the voluntary nature of the consent of the employee who provides access in a signed acknowledgement. The documentation could, for example, include the following statements: (a) the employee understands that she is providing a manager with her password; (b) the manager will use the password to access a group site in which other employees participate; and (c) the employee disclosing her password understands that she will not be subject to any discipline or adverse employment action if (i) she does not provide the password, or (ii) she revokes her consent or changes the password at some future date.

 

Finally, employers should recognize that while the total award in the Houston's case was relatively small, other awards could be much larger. The Plaintiffs in the Houston's case were terminated long before the significant downturn in the economy. In today's economy, backpay awards very well could be larger. In addition, the Stored Communications Act permits for an award of minimum statutory damages of $1,000 per violation. While there is not much case law on the issue, if that provision were read to permit an award of $1,000 per unauthorized access, the multiplier effect could result in substantial statutory damages. Notably, the larger the actual damages award, the greater the likelihood of a substantial punitive damages and fee award.

 

The minimum wage for employees who receive qualified health benefits from their employers will increase from the current $5.85 per hour to $6.55 per hour, while the minimum wage for employees not receiving health benefits will increase from $6.85 per hour to $7.55 per hour.

Click here to download the Nevada Labor Commissioner's 2009 Minimum Wage Bulletin

 

What action should you take now?

 

  • Under Nevada law, employers must pay at least minimum wage for hours worked. If you currently have employees making minimum wage, a pay audit and adjustment is necessary effective July 1 to reflect the new rate.

  • Overtime in Nevada is calculated after 8 hours in a work day or after 40 hours in a work week. The determining factor is whether or not your employees are earning at least 1.5 times the minimum wage, $9.83/hr tier one, $11.33/hr tier two. If they are, then overtime may be calculated after work hours exceed 40 in a work week.

  • Now is a good time to reevaluate current pay rates and work schedules to determine whether it is more cost effective to pay a bit more per hour to move employees to the 40 plus hour work week calculation or continue to pay daily overtime.

  • Remember, overtime is calculated on actual hours worked. PTO, vacation, sick time, holiday pay or other time off is not factored into the hours worked calculation.

  • Keep in mind that collective bargaining agreements or certain position industry classifications may be exempt from this law. Check with your legal counsel and review your union contract.

 

Also note that the Federal minimum wage increased July 24, 2009 to $7.25 per hour. If you have employees and locations in other states, check the current state's minimum wage, typically the higher of the two, state or Federal will be the rate in effect.

 

Submitted by Mary Beth Hartleb J.D., SPHR-CA ,PRISM HR Consulting & Insurance Services, LLC, Phone 702.990.3344, Email. hr@prismhrc.com



 

Your 401(k) offers you an outstanding retirement savings vehicle … with fees attached. Some of these fees are hard to detect unless you read the fine, fine print about what’s going on with your investments. Over time, those fees will actually cut into your retirement savings potential.


How high are these fees?
Typically, 401(k) annual fees run from .25% to 1.5%. The fees are subtracted right out of the savings in your account, and there is no requirement to notify you about them: when you get your quarterly 401(k) statement in the mail, you will find no line-item expense labeled “fees.” The bulk of these fees are for investment services. Most people who invest in 401(k)s, invest in the major mutual funds and have to pay these investment fees by law. (In response, some corporations have created their own generic wholesale funds to give employees lower-cost options.) Some plans also charge fees for legal, administrative, record-keeping and even advertising costs.

The cost to you.

Over a 20- or 30-year period, these fees can really affect the compounding of your assets. The Department of Labor offers an example: if you have $25,000 right now in your 401(k) and just let it sit there, and your investment returns average 7% across the next 35 years with 0.5% annual fees, you will end up with $227,000 in 2042. But if those annual fees are set at 1.5%, you will end up with only $163,000 in 2042. A 1% difference in fees and expenses would leave you with 28% less money for retirement. Wow.

Things may change.

In 2007, the Government Accountability Office issued a report commissioned by Congress that revealed that about 80% of 401(k) plan participants didn't know how many fees they were paying, or how much in fees they are paying. Federal legislators have recently pushed to change the rules on 401(k)s and make the companies that manage them provide clearer and plainer information on fees. In fact, the GAO report urged Congress to require the disclosure of 401(k) fees to permit investors to compare plan options. That would essentially permit you and your co-workers to shop for a 401(k) program as never before. If you want to learn more about how fees might be affecting your 401(k), or if you’d like to learn more about your options, I would recommend speaking with a qualified financial professional. The conversation may help you to better understand your 401(k) and other investments you may have.


For more information about how fees might be affecting your 401(k) contact, Michael L. Carter, Registered Representative,Carter Investment Services,LLC (702) 528-0366 mike@carterinvestmentservices.com


Due to the economy, you have all witnessed that the first thing to be eliminated in the HR budgets are the employee activities fund and rewards programs. To boost employee and company morale, HR directors are looking for innovative ways to be cost efficient and still offer something special for the employees.

There is another way to reward employees for the hard work and positive attitudes without the company having to spend any money. UMC, Nevada Cancer Institute, Pepsi Bottling Group, Zappos.Com, and Yesco Sign Company are just a few of the many companies and organizations that are taking employee discount programs to a whole new level by hosting Employee Appreciation events.

 

These corporations and hospitals are working with an independent company that negotiates huge savings with local and nationwide businesses on live sporting events, travel, day spas, restaurants, car care, and family fun centers. By offering 70-90% off discounts the employees save hundreds of dollars on activities throughout the year, and the employer is now being thanked for allowing these savings to be offered.

Whether you are a HR Director who oversees 75 employees or 4,000 employees you can host an appreciation with minimal work and absolutely no cost to your company. It's the little acts of kindness such as saying "Thank You," that you can do to boost morale in tough times.

It has been stated that the Number 1 reason that affects the happiness or dissatisfaction of employees in the workplace has to do with whether the employee feels that their hard work is being appreciated. Give the employees what they want, host an Employee Appreciation event.



For more information about Employee Appreciation events Contact, Courtney Rakes, Event Coordinator, (this month's newsletter sponsor) Appreciation Events, Direct Phone: 702-326-3947, EventsInVegas@gmail.com

 




Nevada Revised Statutes 392.920 currently prohibits all employers from terminating the employment of a parent, guardian or custodian of a child enrolled in a public school who appears at a conference requested by an administrator or is notified during work of an emergency regarding his or her child.

 

AB 243 extends these protections to the parents, guardians and custodians of children enrolled in private schools as well as additional qualifying leave events.

 

Highlights of AB 243 are as follows;

 

  • AB 243 covers parents, guardians and custodians of children enrolled in public or private school.

  • Applies to employers employing 50 or more employees for each working day in 20 or more calendar weeks in the current calendar year.

  • Employers must give up to 4 hours of leave in increments of at least one hour, on a per child basis, to eligible employees to attend or participate in school-related activities to include: parent-teacher conferences, school-related activities during regular school hours, volunteering or involvement at school, and attendance at other school related events.

  • Leave is unpaid.

  • Documentation may be required by an employer and employees may be required to submit a request for leave in writing five school days prior to the date of the event.

  • Leave may be taken at a time "mutually agreed upon by the employer and the employee," although this is not currently defined in the statute.

  • AB 243 provides additional qualified leave events, remember that existing NV law allowing leave for emergencies or conferences still applies even if the 4 hours of leave are exhausted under AB 243.

  • Collective bargaining agreements may supersede AB 243 if the agreement provides similar protections and leave policies.

 

What Do You Need To Do Now?

 

Policy Review

 

Review current handbook policies and update them as necessary to comply with AB 243. The policy should note that parents attending and participating in school activities will not be discriminated against in any terms or conditions of employment, detail the reasons as listed in AB 243 for those activities that qualify for leave and the total amount of leave that may be taken, require advance notice of at least five school days, supporting documentation requested, state whether leave is paid or unpaid and if unpaid if policy will allow the substitution of accrued vacation or PTO time.

 

Compensation

 

Although leave time is unpaid, if an exempt employee takes time, the FLSA requirements concerning docking pay on an hourly basis may result in exempt employees being paid for leave time.

 

Update Internal Process and Communication

 

In addition to a policy update, administrative and payroll procedures need to be changed to accommodate requests and ensure appropriate tracking of time. We recommend updating existing time off forms and adding an additional time off code to your payroll system. Establish an internal communication to employees and make leave forms available, assign a dedicated person or HR to handle leave requests. We recommend exercising all employer rights under the law and enforce documentation requests and notice requirements on a consistent basis.

 

Training

 

All employees should receive training on the new law and internal policy and process guidance.

 

Submitted by Mary Beth Hartleb J.D., SPHR-CA ,PRISM HR Consulting & Insurance Services, LLC, Phone 702.990.3344, Email. hr@prismhrc.com

 

 

Seaton Curran, an Intellectual Property lawyer in the Las Vegas office of Armstrong Teasdale LLP, has been appointed to the Employee-Management Relations Board (EMRB) by the Governor of Nevada, Jim Gibbons.

 

The EMRB is an agency involved in the process of collective bargaining and labor relations for local government employers and employee associations/unions. The Board consists of three members broadly representative of the public. Each member is appointed by the Governor for a four year term and not more than two may be members of the same political party. The goal of the EMRB is to promote the collective bargaining process, to provide support to those involved in said process, and to settle disputes as they arise in an unbiased and timely manner.

 

Curran primarily concentrates his practice on the preparation and prosecution of U.S. patent applications. He is a registered professional engineer in the state of Nevada. Curran received his J.D. degree from William S. Boyd School of Law – University of Nevada Las Vegas in 2008, his M.B.A. degree from University of Southern California in 2000 and his B.S. in Civil Engineering from Loyola Marymount University in 1996. He is licensed to practice in Nevada. Prior to joining Armstrong Teasdale, Curran was a project manager at Black and Veatch.


Submitted by Mary Peterson, Senior Consultant, CIM Marketing Partners, T:702.944.2464, mpeterson@cimmp.com


 

A young businessman is on his first day in his new job. The President and the HR Department gave him a beautiful corner office and had it furnished with antiques and other elegant furnishings.

Sitting there, he saw the shadow of a man come into the outer office. Wishing to appear the hot shot, the businessman picked up the phone and started to pretend he had a big deal working.

He threw huge figures around and made giant commitments. He motioned to the man in the outer office that he'll be off of the phone in just a minute. Finally he hung up and asked the visitor, "Can I help you?" The man said, "Yeah, I've come to activate your phone lines."

---


The following numbers have not been verified by SNHRA, but they seem kinda true (until you get to the end):

The population of this country is 237 million. 104 million are retired. That leaves 133 million to do the work.

There are 85 million in school, which leave 48 million to do the work. .Of this there are 29 million employed by the federal government. This leaves 19 million to do the work. 4 million are in the Armed Forces, which leaves 15 million to do the work.

Take from the total the 14.8 million people who work for State and City Government and that leaves 200,000 to do the work.

There are 188,000 in hospitals, so that leaves 12,000 to do the work. Now, there are 11,998 people in Prisons.

That leaves Just two people to do the work. You and me. And you're just sitting there reading jokes all day!

 

---

A young executive was leaving the office late one evening when he found the CEO standing in front of a shredder with a piece of paper in his hand..."Listen," said the CEO, "this is a very sensitive and important document here, and my secretary has gone for the night. Can you make this thing work?". "Certainly," said the young executive. He turned the machine on, inserted the paper, and pressed the start button..."Excellent, excellent!" said the CEO as his paper disappeared inside the machine. "I just need one copy."

 

Courtesy of www.comedy-zone.net

 

 

 

 

Contact Courtney Rakes, Event Coordinator: 702-326-3947 EventsInVegas@gmail.com

 

 

We hope that all of our Members and Friends find the articles contained within R E S O U R C E S  useful in your HR environment.
Many thanks to all of you who responded to our requests
for articles and research for this newsletter.

If you have anything you wish to contribute to the next issue, please do not hesitate to email Barry Lippold at blippold@marcison.com.

 

 

 

Contact Barry Lippold at 702-281-6528 for pricing and availability
to sponsor future R E S O U R C E S editions

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


© 2008-9 SNHRA.ORG All Rights Reserved. | Designed by Marc Ison Design Plus, Inc.

 

Quick Nav

SNHRA.ORG

Newsletter: 2009 Edition 8