Many governmental and business leaders have advocated a federal-implemented ID card system for all citizens as a means to address voter fraud, unauthorized workers and terrorists’ infiltration of the country. Various legislative attempts by members of the U.S. Congress and the federal administration have been thwarted by state governments as further intrusions of their sovereignty and individual citizens as a loss of privacy.

Although it’s understandable why state governments and U.S. citizens may not want a federal ID card, the lack of such a system is causing security, economic and electoral security problems that are costing states, businesses throughout the U.S. and individuals large amounts of time and money.

What could be a simple solution is for the federal government to legislate certain standards for such a system, but allow the states to implement and administer it. Anyone with a driver’s license has already accepted a form of state-issued identification, so adapting a similar card and system for the purpose of general identification should be much more palatable by most citizens at the state level.

An individual’s state-implemented ID card would be scanned when voting or applying for a job and, instead of it being linked to a federal database, it would be verified by a state system.

According to experts, another benefit is that it would be easier to eliminate fraudulent voters and unauthorized workers with the use of a single card and system. Employers that used the system would not be subject to the various laws against employing illegal workers, reducing fraud, paperwork and other administrative costs.

It has been estimated that a states-based ID card system would only cost a few billion dollars and could be introduced in a year or less. For individual citizens, the greatest benefit could be more jobs available for legal workers and, when the economy was robust, wages would increase because of labor shortages.

According to a 2005 research study conducted by Hewlett-Packard and the Institute of Psychiatry at the University of London, employees’ use of cell phones and other technology for personal conversations, texting and other social media could reduce their IQs by 10 points—which is twice as much as the effect of marijuana.

When employees are distracted from their work to answer calls or to “tweet” a friend, they are not only reducing productivity, but also putting themselves in danger. The loss of focus on the task at hand to use a cell phone can cause a truck driver to swerve into the next lane of traffic or a machine operator to injure him or others.

Various experts in support of the study’s findings say that the simplest and most effective solution to the personal use of cell phones and other technology devices during work hours is to be sure a company’s employee handbook states a clear policy that is fairly, but firmly, applied.

In the small-business environment, the business owner may also be the “HR manager”; in that, he or she is likely to be the person who must dismiss high-risk or medium-risk employees.

High-risk employees are those that must be leave the premises as soon as possible because of the severity of the infraction that led to termination. Before he or she is escorted through the door, the small-business owner or manager must create a termination notification that briefly describes why the employee is being terminated.

Business policies that are explained to all employees, even verbally, can protect most businesses from a termination “battle”; however, business owners must prove that their employees know those policies and the consequences.

A medium-risk employee is treated a bit differently, since he or she may have been disciplined previously and is being dismissed for continuing to violate that policy or rule. The employee must understand why he or she is being terminated, and it’s best to speak with him or her directly and not through a supervisor. Documenting the termination—when it occurs—is the best way to reduce the risk of being sued.

Business owners should keep in mind that there are many federal statues relating to age discrimination, disabilities, family and medical leave, etc. that could affect employment claims and liabilities.

Businesses may lose market share and suffer from static growth during any economic crisis (local, national or global), but it’s essential that they retain those employees who have a positive impact on their businesses.

These are the employees who are willing to assume more responsibilities when some of their co-workers are released, who contribute new ideas to help their employers survive, and who remain positive during the crisis. Without de-humanizing these valuable employees, business owners must protect and nurture these human assets as they do with their financial assets.

There are six steps you can take to keep the employees that are more likely to help you the most to survive a bad economy and thrive when conditions improve. Read the rest of this entry

According to a Cvent Web Survey white paper, “Companies that encourage or engage their employees to provide ideas and suggestions have consistently higher employee retention rates.”

Businesses invest too much time and money in each employee they lose, and to find a replacement. In fact, the same Survey found that “it can cost 10 times more to hire and train a new employee than it does to retain one.”

An employee survey is one of the most effective and inexpensive methods to engage your employees, so they feel empowered to contribute to the direction and success of the company.

Make sure your surveys are anonymous, so employees can provide honest feedback without any fear of retribution. Structure your surveys, so employees can answer questions or make comments that relate to their position or division of the company. Finally, share the survey results with your employees, even though some of those results may be negative, because only then will they feel they’ve made an impact and be willing to implement new ideas.

Historically, the U.S. Army and other branches of the federal government are where the first conscious efforts of employee performance review were instituted; however, the employers were more focused on personality traits than behavior and results.

In fact, General Cass, who is credited with the first-known, formal evaluation of soldiers in 1813, treated the process with a good bit of humor, “This officer has talents, but has kept them well hidden” and “He is open to suggestions, but never follows same.” Since the general had established no specific goals for his men, he was left with a half-hearted attempt that was of no value to anyone, except as a chuckle during the officer’s mess.
Lord & Taylor, a New York department store, may have been the first private business to implement a formal evaluation procedure of its employees, which motivated other businesses, following World War I, to do likewise.

Although government and business have made numerous attempts to develop a “universal” evaluation system throughout the 20th century (and into the 21st), today half of all large businesses and most of small businesses either do not have formal employee performance reviews or still incorrectly focus their reviews on traits instead of results.

If you purchased Your Employee Handbook a while ago — say, more than a year — take a moment to read it and see if all the information within is accurate and still current. If it’s not it is time to update and redistribute. Hundreds of employers a year find themselves on the losing end of lawsuits that focus on the fact that the polices in their handbook did not match the practices of the company. Further, policies where a specific employee is identified as the point of contact, for example, reporting sexual harassment, update the Handbook if that employee is no longer with your company. Similarly, update any changes to time-off policies, job classifications and the like. Updates are essential if you want to get the most protection out of Your Employee Handbook.

Employees want to know their opinion matters to their boss, according to a recent Badbossology.com survey sponsored by Development Dimensions International.

In a survey of 500 global employees, the majority responded that if they had the chance to walk in the shoes of their boss, the first order of business would be to ask employees what they should change.

This response shows that employees want to contribute to workplace transitions, especially when there is a new boss in place, according to Rich Wellins, Senior Vice President, DDI.

Specifically, when asked what’s the first thing they would do if they switched roles with their boss tomorrow, of the 584 people who completed the survey: 34% would ask their employees what they would like to change; 12% would replace at least one employee; 20% would reorganize the department and/or reassign responsibilities; and 32% would meet with their boss to clarify expectations.

Read the rest of this entry

Having a coffee break or two plays an important role in getting many people through their work day, according to a new survey.

A news release from the CareerBuilder Web site said 49% of workers take a coffee break at least once, while 32% head to the coffee machine at least two times each workday.

But the survey found that people are taking the opportunity presented by their caffeine breaks to do a lot of other unusual things (ranked by CareerBuilder):

1. Proposed marriage
2. Judged a “Best Legs” contest
3. Shrink wrapped a co-worker’s new car
4. Did step aerobics by his cubicle
5. Left the office to chase a weasel outside
6. Had a burping contest
7. Ran a race in a wedding dress
8. Kissed another employee in the stairwell
9. Did a fast re-enactment of the “Rocky Horror Picture Show”
10. Walked a new-born turkey around the building

Only 15% of respondents said they looked for another job while getting more coffee. When broken down by industry, banking and finance workers are the most likely to search for a job during their coffee breaks at 29%, followed by health care at 21%.

This survey was conducted online within the U.S. by Harris Interactive on behalf of CareerBuilder.com among 5,600 U.S. employees (employed full-time; not self-employed; with no involvement in hiring decisions) ages 18 and over between June 1 and June 13, 2007.

The most common chronic conditions that led to 10 or more days of employee absences in 2003 from work were depression, sadness or mental illness, followed by any type of cancer and respiratory disorders, according to a recent study by the American Hospital Association (AHA).

Nearly 30% of workers reported health problems in 2003, with 44% saying they took one to five sick days because of these problems and 20% saying they took six or more sick days.

The study showed that employees on average missed more than 10 days for the following chronic conditions:

Depression/Sadness/Mental Illness, 25.6 days;
Cancer, 16.9 days;
Respiratory Disorders, 14.7 days;
Asthma, 12 days;
Migraine/Headache, 10.7 days;
Allergy, 8.2 days
Heart Disease, 6.8 days;
Arthritis, 5.9 days; and
Diabetes, 2 days.

Read the full report from the American Hospital Association.