Quit Now

Article Source: OfficeTeam via CCH

A stronger economy often gives workers greater courage to change jobs, but the excuses offered for jumping ship can leave many employers perplexed. A new OfficeTeam survey reveals the wackiest reasons job seekers have given for handing in their notice. Here are some examples:

  • “Someone left because her boss lost the dog she had given him.”
  • “Our employee said he was joining the circus.”
  • “One person left because she lost her cell phone too many times at work.”
  • “We had someone quit to participate in a reality show.”
  • “An employee said it was his routine to change jobs every six months.”

The survey was conducted by an independent research firm and is based on telephone interviews with more than 1,300 senior managers at companies with 20 or more employees in the United States and Canada.

Some individuals simply had to follow their true calling:

  • “One worker left to become an apple farmer.”
  • “A staff member quit to climb Mount Everest.”
  • “There was an individual who left to play the trombone.”
  • “An employee wanted to enter a beauty contest.”
  • “One worker quit to join a rock band.”

It may be hard to fault these professionals for their honesty:

  • “A guy said he was making too much money and didn’t feel he was worth it.”
  • “One person left because she didn’t want to work so hard.”
  • “An individual said he was bored.”
  • “Someone quit because she was going to live off her trust fund.”
  • “An employee said work was getting in the way of having fun.”

And there were other employees who suffered from sensory overload:

  • “He quit because he didn’t like the way the office smelled.”
  • “One employee didn’t enjoy the cafeteria food.”
  • “An individual did not like the sound of file cabinets being slammed.”

And finally, these shortsighted workers gave notice when a day off might have sufficed:

  • “One person quit to watch a soccer tournament.”
  • “We had someone leave because he had to stay home to feed his dog.”
  • “An employee left because he wanted to watch a movie with his girlfriend during work hours.”

(Ok Cascade Members, what are the zaniest reasons you have had from an employee giving their notice or just quitting on the spur of the moment?  Leave us a comment below!)

Share

{ 0 comments }

Life's a roller coaster

On May 14, 2012 the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the National Labor Relation’s Board’s new “quickie” election rules that took effect on April 30 are not enforceable. The Court’s decision was based on the fact that the rules were passed by the Board without the three person quorum required under the National Labor Relations Act. By eliminating a prior rule requiring at least 25 days between a union petition and election, the new rules were designed to shorten the time between these two events to an average of 21 days rather than the current 40 day average. This shortened timeframe would have greatly impeded the ability of employers to effectively respond to union campaigns and likely have resulted in an increase in unionization.

While this is good news for employers, it may only temporary. When the rules passed in December 2011, the NLRB only had three members and one refused to participate in the vote, thus the required quorum was not met. The Board now has five members and it could appeal the decision or reissue the rules entirely with the intent of passing them with the required quorum.

Cascade will continue to keep you informed as more information becomes available. Of course, please do not hesitate to contact us with any question you have.

Jenna

Share

{ 0 comments }

If you had talked to me a year ago, I’d have sounded much different that I do today. I was driven. I embraced hard work with an enthusiasm usually reserved for only lovers or coconut cream pie. I would state, quite proudly, “Nobody can outwork me.” What I meant by that was if somebody nearby seemed to raise the bar, I was determined to outpace them.

This might have gone on forever, except that life intervened to stop me in my tracks.

When my elderly father got sick, I did the only thing I felt I could do as the only child–especially as a daughter. I dropped everything to be there, take care of him, and help my mom.

One of my older friends refers to this as the “dutiful daughter” syndrome. Herself a dutiful daughter, she took a lengthy leave of absence to return to the Deep South to care for her dying father. It was the only thing to do, given that her mom is in her eighties and battling her own health problems. And living all the way on the other side of the country made her choice even more necessary. Anyway she looked at it, getting from her home in the Pacific Northwest to her parents’ home in South Louisiana was a two day affair. Being there, putting the rest of her life and career on hold, seemed to be the only option.

Now I hear that 30 year old, “millennial” women are burning out. They’ve grown up with full schedules–extra-curriculars galore plus school work–and many, it’s reported, have no “off” button. My guess is that the word “yes,” escapes their lips all too often as they soar into the stratosphere of their ambitions and aspirations. If they’re anything like the beautiful twenty-somethings I chat with, these women found non-profits (or volunteer at them) while aiming for meaningful career paths. And it’s the desire for meaning that seems to drive them hardest of all.

According the MTV’s “No Collar” study, loving their work far outranks salary and bonuses in the minds of millennials of both genders. Half of millennials surveyed (males and females combined) said they’d rather have no job than a job they hated. A full 90% of them think they “deserve” their dream job. All these expectations create a pressure cooker in the workplace. But for women, this pressure cooker has added heat.

In their 2007 article for Harvard Business Review, Alice H. Eagly and Linda L. Carly, write, “Although it is common knowledge that mothers provide more child care than fathers, few people realize that mothers provide more than they did in earlier generations—despite the fact that fathers are putting in a lot more time than in the past.”

These additional hours of demands at home run smack into the bias against women on the “mommy track” that’s still the norm in many organizations. It’s not unusual, according to Eagly and Carly, for moms to be passed over while men with same-age children are promoted. The demands of childcare are often posited as the reason why. Everybody knows that for women, their families will come first, right? I shudder when I compare this what a CEO of a Fortune-500 told me last week about people who don’t get promoted: “the ones who put their self-interest ahead of the company’s.”

As a productivity coach, I often find myself wanting to convince my young professional women clients to say ‘no’ more often. If they could bring themselves to turn down some requests, perhaps the breathing space would be enough to keep them from flaming out. But when the child or the husband or the parent gets sick, there is no saying no to that.

What are your experiences with millennials or as a millennial in today’s work world? How does your organization respond to women on the “mommy-track?”

 

###

About the Author:

Tara is the newest member of the Cascade Employers team. As the Productivity Facilitator, her specialty is helping people conquer overwhelm and overload. She provides coaching services as well as speaking and training on many topics related to work productivity. You can learn more about her by visiting our website.

Share

{ 0 comments }

Cute white puppy on the side of the road

 

Most employers agree that managing attendance is a challenge. Blanket attendance policy statements are common and often read something like, “regular attendance is essential for every position.” While this sounds like a reasonable expectation, in ADA terms, this is not necessarily true. Because “essential” attendance depends on the job itself, a more effective approach to attendance management is to outline the attendance requirements specific to each position in the relevant job description.

This approach is supported by a recent Ninth Circuit case. On April 11, 2012, in Samper v. Providence St. Vincent Medical Center, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the ADA:

  •  Does not require an employer to provide accommodations that compromise performance quality; and,
  •  When reliable dependable performance requires reliable and dependable attendance, an employer can insist disabled employees meet attendance requirements.

Samper was a neo-natal intensive care unit (“NICU”) nurse with a disability. She asked that her employer modify its attendance policy to allow her an unspecified number of unplanned absences. The hospital’s attendance policy permitted employees up to five unplanned absences during a rolling 12-month period in addition to unplanned absences relating to other types of leave. The hospital also provided various accommodations, including allowing her to swap shifts and not scheduling her to work on consecutive days. Samper’s absences consistently exceeded the standard and, as a result the hospital terminated her employment. Samper filed suit alleging a violation of the ADA due to failure to accommodate.

Siding with the employer, the Court focused on two issues – whether regular attendance is an essential function of the job, and whether an exemption from a reasonable attendance policy is a reasonable accommodation.

With respect to the first issue, the hospital had a written job description which required strict adherence to the attendance policy and listed attendance and punctuality as essential functions. It also demonstrated that NICU nurses must have specialized training and that it is very difficult to find replacements, especially for unscheduled absences. It could show that understaffing compromises patient care. The Court provided a variety of case examples where regular attendance would be essential including: the need to work as part of a team; necessary face-to-face interaction with clients and other employees; and, working with equipment on-site.

The Court also concluded that the requested accommodation of a self-determined, open-ended schedule was unreasonable on its face.

Employers asked to accommodate absences should keep in mind:

For purposes of ADA compliance, a realistic, reasonable attendance policy is easier to justify than one that provides no flexibility to employees.
Blanket attendance rules will not relieve an employer from ADA accommodation obligations. Employers are required to engage in an interactive process with each disabled employee to determine the availability of a reasonable accommodation that takes into account the employee’s particular needs and the requirements of the position.

Physical attendance at the worksite can be an essential function when work cannot be performed remotely, or if performing the job remotely would hinder performance quality. Remember though, not every job has the technical or patient care requirements of a neo-natal nurse.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
Share

{ 0 comments }