There are numerous views about tenure, and one can easily get lost in the back-and-forth debate and discussions about the topic.
However, having an understanding of the origins and purposes of tenure should provide a foundation – a starting point that will provide therefore a perspective on tenure itself but also the varying views held about its value and perhaps, most importantly, whether tenure should be continued.
What is disparate impact, and when is it an issue for employers conducting background checks? What if state law conflicts with federal guidelines on background checks?
These are just some of the questions CUPA-HR’s chief government relations officer, Josh Ulman, asked the EEOC’s Jim Paretti in a recent interview.
Jim is special assistant and counsel to Commissioner Victoria Lipnic of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the interview took place soon after the EEOC issued an update to its guidance on how employers could use arrest and conviction records. Jim offers clear definitions and excellent examples of the situations the guidance is intended to address.
If you have 15 minutes, it’s worth watching!
One of the foundation stones of current employment law in the United States is the pieces of legislation that were passed in the 1960s and 1970s to correct questionable employment practices, such as the overt discrimination in help wanted ads.
Here are examples of ads that were typically placed in newspapers in 1960.
As HR professionals we are supposed to be all about motivating, coaching, goal setting, recognizing and rewarding.
The tough part is to “redirect” bad behaviors, document the unacceptable, mediate the near to impossible, and yes, to occasionally dismiss the incorrigible.
If that isn’t enough challenge, we must oversee an integral part of these activities: the annual performance review process.
Have you seen the recent BloombergBusinessWeek post written by Liz Ryan?
I recently shared this post with the CUPA-HR board of directors and it created a great buzz. A couple of “brave” board members even admitted to sharing the post with their presidents and challenging their presidents to hold them accountable for the 10 “things your HR head should be doing now.”
Here are the 10 items that Liz shares with my adaptations for higher education.
No, don’t ask me to tell you exactly what I mean, and definitely don’t ask me to give you a list of competencies, emotional intelligence coefficients or (insert the latest buzz words here) so that we can scientifically define the engaged employee.
What I can tell you is what I see and experience through my interactions with him or her. Here is a partial list.
I was not paddled. Nor was I thrown in a trunk with a case of beer. This hazing looked a lot different. More subtle, but troubling nonetheless.
Also, it was not the whole organization that was initiating members. It was one guy, who seemed intent on breaking in new hires (myself included) by verbally attacking them at meetings, quickly dismissing their ideas, and generally being awful to work with.
After some time he would let these newbies off the hook, then start again with a new crop of hires. And, by the way, this individual was a seasoned vice-president.