|
Server : Apache/2.4.62 System : FreeBSD fbsdweb2.web.rcn.net 14.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 14.1-RELEASE releng/14.1-n267679-10e31f0946d8 GENERIC amd64 User : www ( 80) PHP Version : 8.3.8 Disable Function : NONE Directory : /domains/highlandlabs/cqi-bin/ALFA_DATA/alfasymlink/root/domains/hrahg/hru/otj/ |
Upload File : |
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<title>HRA - On The Job</title>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
<meta name="robots" content="noarchive, nofollow" />
<link rel="stylesheet" href="hronthejob.css" />
</head>
<body>
<div id="header" align="center">
<img src="../../graphics/logo.jpg" style="height: 100px; margin: auto; display: block; text-align: center" />
<b style="color: blue">Human Resource Associates</b>
</div>
<div id="wrapper">
<div id="content">
<h2>HR - On The Job</h2>
<h3>What Gets You Up The Ladder, Won't Keep You There</h3>
<p>In a recent report from the American Management Association (AMA), it affirmed that 40 percent of all new executives fail to last 18 months. For many career-conscious managers, that's a shocker. We generally assume that arriving at the top is the reward for all we've done. Surely if we just keep on doing that, we're going to survive! But that's not the word from those executives who have kept their careers hot and alive for the long haul. You find that their “voice of experience” tells a surprising but logical story.</p>
<p>For his new book, “To the Next Level: What insiders know about executive success”, Author Scott Eblin interviewed 30 of the most successful executives with the longest careers that he knew. He wanted them to hear the secret to their staying power. In his book he quotes a senior executive saying that it's a new mindset, “At the executive level it's business first, function second”. Manager's success stories are about functional expertise. But executives are expected to be leaders for the entire organization not just a piece of it. When managers become executives, they have to realize that the game has changed and adjustments are in order. There are beliefs and behaviors that must go.</p>
<p>The main challenge is to get your ego out of the way. The best answers will not always come from you. You will drown under the workload if you try to be the answer expert on all issues. As an Executive you must focus on the “What” and let your team focus on the “How”.</p>
<p>Eblin discovered that self confidence and the ability to work with others are key virtues. Insecure executives make lousy leaders. He advised, “Don't make a big hassle trying to prove you're competent, but neither should you allow yourself to be intimidated. If you do, people will discount you quickly”. He also noted that “The more you engage with your peers, the more your confidence will grow”. To make it as one of the successful survivors, he recommends letting go of the following old beliefs and behaviors.</p>
<ul>
<li><b>Let go of self-doubt:</b> An insecure executive makes a lousy leader. Put confidence in your presence and purpose, even if it doesn't come out naturally at first.</li>
<li><b>Let go of running flat-out until you crash:</b> Working 24/7 may have made you a superstar. But keep that up at the top, where the expectations are enormous, and you'll burn out. Break the cycle by building up time for recovery and renewal into your schedule.</li>
<li><b>Let go of one-size-fits-all communication:</b> Customize every message for the group and goals at hand. And remember, the less you say, the more you say it. So master the art of the headline.</li>
<li><b>Let go of self-reliance:</b> Replace “me” with “we”. You may have advanced on your own, but now you're only as good as your team.</p>
<li><b>Let go of the urge to tell “How”:</b> No more micromanaging. Set the agenda for what gets done and leave the how to your team.</p>
<li><b>Let go of responsibility:</b> Don't sweat the small stuff. Responsibility for a few results belongs to your team. Accountability for many results and the over-all goals belong to you.</li>
<li><b>Let go of looking up and down:</b> There's more to consider than what's up with the boss or what's going on down in the ranks. Look left and right, partnerships with your peers are key to success.</li>
<li><b>Let go of an inside-out view:</b> An internal perspective may have served you in the past, but not here and not now. Lead with an outside-in view by understanding the issues in the external environment.</li>
<li><b>Let go of the small footprint:</b> Your days of “low profile” are over. At the top, you act and speak on behalf of your entire company. Mind your manners and your messages.</li>
<li><b>Let go of the “my career over yours” attitude:</b> Your career is still important to you. But you are now accountable for the development and capabilities of the people on your team.</li>
</ul>
<hr />
<p align="center"><b><i>Have an employment question?</i></b></p>
<p align="center">Send it to <a href="mailto:[email protected]?subject=From HR On The Job">[email protected]</a>.</p>
<p align="center">Please include Company Name and Association in your e-mail. Company identification will be kept confidential.</p>
<hr />
<h2>Hitchhiking on the Information Highway</h2>
<h3>Unemployment - A Reality Check</h3>
<p>Economists estimate that the U.S. needs to create a little over 400,000 jobs per month in order for the economy to recover by 2015. Although Uncle Sam says it has created over 5 million jobs since January 2009, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) doesn't agree.</p>
<p>According to BLS there were 142, 099,000 people working in January 2009. They also report that there were 142,278,000 people working in May 2012. That's an increase of 179,000 jobs in 40 months, for an average of 4,475 jobs per month. So instead of the over 400,000 jobs we need per month were getting a little over 4,000. That's 1% of what we need. How long will it take at that rate to achieve the recovery?</p>
<ul>
<li>The unemployment rate in January 2009 was 7.2%, in May 2012 it is 8.2%.</li>
<li>If we count all those who dropped out of the labor market, or used up their unemployment benefits (and therefore no longer being counted as unemployed) the unemployment rate would be 14.8%.</li>
<li>We now have the lowest workforce participation rate in over 30 years.</li>
<li>Statistically, the workers who dropped out of the labor market were all women as the male participation rate actually increased slightly.</li>
<li>Statistically, the number of new jobs created were all part-time jobs as the number of part-time jobs increased by 618,000 jobs while the number of full-time jobs dropped so low that it wiped out all the previous gains for the last three months.</li>
<li>The majority of the unemployed workers have some college education (52%) while the number of unemployed workers who completed was 8%.</li>
<li>The average hours per week worked dropped to 34.4 hours. The drop is equivalent to the loss of 200,000 job lost.</li>
<li>Approximately half of all those unemployed have been so for over 27 weeks.</li>
<li>Over 70,000 Americans are set to lose their unemployment benefits in June.</li>
<li>The industry with the highest rate of unemployment is Construction workers at 14.2%.</li>
<li>The industry with the lowest rate of unemployment is Government workers at 4.2%.</li>
</ul>
<p class="quote">“I smile because I don't know what the hell is going on”<br />
- Maxine</p>
<h3>Where are the Jobs?</h3>
<p>Actually there are now over 700,000 jobs open that are not being filled. Those employers are getting desperate as recruiting and head-hunting agencies reporting a surge in business. Why aren't the unemployed filling those jobs?</p>
<ol>
<li>Unqualified</li>
<li>Undesirable work</li>
<li>Requires re-location</li>
<li>Poverty entitlements are greater than the jobs pay</li>
</ol>
<p class="quote">“I have a Liberal Arts degree.<br />
Do you want fries with that?<br />
- Mickey Gorman</p>
<h3>Are You Too Rich or Too Poor?</h3>
<p>We used to consider that anyone making over $1,000,000 per year was rich. So we didn't mind that the tax rates were higher for them. Some time ago that figure was reduced to $500,000 per year. We thought including them in that higher tax paying group was okay too.</p>
<p>But as Uncle Sam and the states began busting their budgets and looking for more revenue, the idea arose that those making $250,000 annually (which includes most small businesses) would also be considered too rich and must now be included in that higher tax group. So does the government feel that they have enough money coming in now? Does the spending stop? Did it slow diminish any?</p>
<p>Of course spending increased more than ever. So what's the next answer? Well the state of Maryland has a solution we never thought of. The state just ruled that those making over $100,000 must now be corralled into that unhappy, higher tax paying group. $100,000 a year is just too rich. But let's take a reality check here too. Almost 40% of the school teachers in Montgomery County Maryland make over $1,000.00 per year. Many government workers in retirement are making over $100,000 per year.</p>
<p>The oncoming dichotomy; Eligibility for some U.S. poverty programs allow incomes up to $74,000 per year! If you're too poor at $74,000 and too rich at $100,000 what's going to happen when the states decide to lower that higher taxed group to those making $75,000?</p>
<p class="quote">“A government that robs Peter to pay Paul<br />
can always count on the support of Paul.”</p>
<h3>Some Stuff You Might Like To Know</h3>
<p><b>Question:</b> Is overweight considered a disability within the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)?</p>
<p><b>Answer:</b> The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently won a court case against an employer on this issue. The employer terminated an employee in a health treatment center who weighed 500 pounds because she had limited ability to move around and was unable to perform CPR. She later died of morbid obesity. The EEOC still filed the case saying that she should have been provided an accommodation under the ADA. A federal court in Louisiana agreed with the EEOC that Obesity is covered under the ADA if the employee is twice the normal weight.</p>
<p>New Social Security numbering system may cause a few problems: Those who are older may be familiar with the secret of decoding SS#s. The first three numbers told you the state in which the Social Security card was issued. The middle two numbers placed you in various groups and the last four digits were your actual serial number.</p>
<p>However, as a result of so many demographic changes and the rise of identity theft, the Social Security Administration (SSA) is abandoning that tidy system. It is now assigning SS# randomly and will for the first time begin using 7s and 8s as beginning numbers. This can be a problem for software programs that perform edits and checks of SS#. Such programs typically reject SS# that begin with 7s and 8s. So alert your IT providers, payroll services and 401(k) administrators to the change. Also consider using the SSA verification service that will almost instantly confirm that the employee's name and SS# are valid matches. You can register with the SSA to use this service at <a href="www.ssa.gov/employer/ssnv.htm">www.ssa.gov/employer/ssnv.htm</a>.
<p class="quote">“He who knows not and knows not he knows not: he is a fool - shun him.<br />
He who knows not and knows he knows not: he is simple - teach him.<br />
He who knows and knows not he knows: he is asleep - wake him.<br />
He who knows and knows he knows: he is wise - follow him.”</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: center"><sub>© William J. Cook</sub></p>
</div>
<div id="sidebar">
<span class="heading">Labor Stats</span>
<hr />
<b>Federal Minimum Wage</b>
<hr />
<p align="center">
<b>$7.25</b>/hour<br />
</p>
<hr />
<b>Average Income</b>
<hr />
<table>
<tr><td /><td class="u">May 2012</td><td class="u">May 2011<td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">Hourly</td><td class="b">$23.41</td><td class="b">$23.02</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">Weekly</td><td class="b">$805.30</td><td class="b">$791.89</td></tr>
</table>
<hr />
<b>Federal Povery Level</b>
<hr />
<table>
<tr><td class="i">one person</td><td class="b">$10,956</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">family of four</td><td class="b">$21,954</td></tr>
</table>
<hr />
<b>IRS Mileage Allowance</b>
<hr />
<p>July 1, 2011 through December 31, 2012</p>
<table>
<tr><td class="i">business</td><td><b>55.5</b> cents/mile</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">medical or moving</td><td class="b">23.5</b></td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">charitable</td><td class="b">14.0</td></tr>
</table>
<hr />
<b>Postage</b>
<hr />
<table>
<tr><td class="i">1 oz</td><td><b>44</b> cents</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">postcard</td><td class="b">29</td></tr>
</table>
<hr />
<b>Population</b>
<hr />
<table>
<tr><td class="i">world</td><td class="b">7 billion</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">U.S.</td><td class="b">313.7 million</td></tr>
</table>
<p align="center">
<i>one birth every </i><b>8</b><i> seconds;</i><br />
<i>one death every </i><b>14</b><i> seconds;</i><br />
<i>one new immigrant every </i><b>44</b><i> seconds;</i><br />
<i>net gain of one person every </i><b>13</b><i> seconds.</i>
</p>
<hr />
<b>U.S. Civilian Workforce</b>
<hr />
<table>
<tr><td /><td class="u">May 2012</td><td class="u">May 2011</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">Total</td><td class="b">242,964,000</td><td class="b">239,313,000</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">Employed</td><td class="b">142,287,000</td><td class="b">139,808,000</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">Unemployed</td><td class="b">12,720,000</td><td class="b">13,892,000</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">Want A Job</td><td class="b">6,291,000</td><td class="b">6,216,000</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">Unemployment Rate</td><td class="b">8.2%</td><td class="b">9.0%</td></tr>
</table>
<br /><hr />
<b>U.S. Workforce Productivity</b><br />
<sub><i>(The amount of goods produced, divided by the number of work hours it took to produce it)</i></sub>
<hr />
<table>
<tr><td class="i">1992</td><td class="b">3.7%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">1993</td><td class="b">0.5%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">1994</td><td class="b">1.3%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">1995</td><td class="b">0.9%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">1996</td><td class="b">2.5%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">1997</td><td class="b">2.0%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">1998</td><td class="b">2.6%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">1999</td><td class="b">3.3%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">2000</td><td class="b">3.4%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">2001</td><td class="b">2.9%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">2002</td><td class="b">4.6%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">2003</td><td class="b">3.7%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">2004</td><td class="b">2.8%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">2005</td><td class="b">1.7%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">2006</td><td class="b">0.9%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">2007</td><td class="b">1.9%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">2008</td><td class="b">1.8%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">2009</td><td class="b">+5.8%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">2010</td><td class="b">+3.6%</td></tr>
<tr><td class="i">2011</td><td class="b">+0.7%</td></tr>
</table>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>