The Drive To Be Unproductive:
How Long Commutes Affect Workplace Efficiency

According to an article in Yahoo! News, there is one thing that all employees have in common: a burning dislike for their morning commute. Let's face it, it's not the actual commute that most people dislike, it's the hassle of dealing with traffic, long lines, and rude people that make the trip so despised.

It doesn't matter how an employee gets to work -- whether it's by car, train, plane, boat, or just walking, there's always one or more aspects of the commute that person would like to change. How an employee starts the day is an important indicator of his or her attitude for the rest of that day.

Managers need to determine what an employee needs to be the most productive while at work. Some things are within their control, such as having the best equipment, providing the most up-to-date training, or even a supplying a kick-start of coffee or a snack. However, there are a plethora of items outside their control that can disrupt productivity, such as the need for eight hours of sleep, family issues, or even a particularly grueling commute. Research from the Office of National Statistics in the United Kingdom found that employees with a 45-minute or longer commute are less satisfied with their lives, rated their daily activities as less worthwhile, and reported higher anxiety than employees who don't have a long commute each morning.

If a manager doesn't have to endure the horrors of a long and demanding commute, it might be difficult for that person to understand the impact it has on an employee's productivity and overall morale. Considering that the average worker spends five weeks a year commuting, it's easy to see how someone might not feel motivated when he or she reaches the workplace.

Fortunately, restoring motivation in an employee with a lengthy commuting is relatively easy. That being said, it takes a manager who is willing to make compromises, have a fair amount of trust in his or her employees, and the necessary equipment -- or the ability to lay the groundwork -- to let them telecommute if the situation arises.

There is no doubt that a manager assumes a small amount of risk when letting an employee work from home, but if that manager is confident in the employee's work ethic, then there should not be a reason to worry. In fact, most employees who telecommute report that they actually work harder from home than they do in the office because they felt like they had to "prove themselves" to their colleagues and show that they were pulling their weight.

When telecommuting is not an option, there are plenty of small changes in the workplace that can be made to help ease the pressure on workers who commute long distances:

• Allow commuting employees to work one day a week from home. The break from the commute will ease their stress and show them that you understand their situation.
• If employees primarily take public transportation as a way to get to work, then count one hour toward their time in the office as long as they use a laptop or other device to do job-related functions.
• Have flexible office hours so that employees can arrive, work an appropriate amount of time, then leave so as to avoid both morning and evening rush hours.
• Offer support (such as moving expenses, paid time off, etc.) to workers who are willing to relocate closer to the office.

Finally, be sympathetic. An employee may not have a choice when it comes to their commute and a little understanding can go a long way in making that person feel as though someone understands their morning struggle.

Is Facebook "Liked" For Job Searching?

"I haven't had an orthodox career, and I've wanted more than anything to have your respect. The first time I didn't feel it, but this time I feel it, and I can't deny the fact that you like me, right now, you like me!" -- Sally Field, Academy Award acceptance speech for Best Actress in 1984's Places in the Heart.

It's nice to be liked and it seems as though everyone is on Facebook these days, but is that the best social media website when it comes to finding a job?  The answer depends on whom you ask, but based on an article in Human Resource Executive Online it appears that LinkedIn is still king when it comes to job seekers as well as recruiters.

As social media becomes more popular, the line between personal life and professional life is starting to fade. However, at least for now, people still use various websites for specific objectives. Facebook, which is arguably the dominant social media site, is almost never used as the primary method for finding a job. According to the article, there are 1.3 billion users on Facebook and only 277 million users on LinkedIn, yet the latter is preferred with 94% of recruiters citing it as their go-to social network for finding talent, according to a Jobvite poll.

Furthermore, according to a recent Link Humans poll, nearly 70% of employees surveyed say they have never turned to Facebook in search of employment opportunities, with almost 95% indicating they've never found an opening and subsequently been hired via Facebook.

That doesn't mean that Facebook is completely useless when it comes to the job search, especially if the job is specific to marketing, social media, or relevant technology. Facebook has several advantages when it comes to building a corporate brand in which top talent would want to work, and also for potential job candidates to do research and familiarize themselves with an organization before their interview.  Many Human Resource professionals already use social media to research potential job prospects, so it's only natural that these prospects use social media to examine companies and their C-level executives.

It could be only a matter of time before all those people who grew up using Facebook as a way to connect will become senior executives who will then use Facebook to expand the corporate culture. The bottom line is that both job seekers and recruiters need to be aware of all social media avenues as their online personal and professional lives may soon converge into one.

Risky Business

Of all the temporary jobs out there, none probably carries more risk than being the President of the United States. However, for most people, having a temporary job requires a fast learning curve, especially when it comes to safety. Sure, an office job sounds fairly safe, but what about general contractors, factory workers, and construction workers? These positions are far more hazardous and both the employee and employer need to step up their game to ensure the task can be completed with minimal risk.

An article in Human Resource Executive Online says that reducing injuries among temporary workers continues to be a major priority for OSHA, which recently boosted its communications efforts around the agency's Temporary Worker Initiative.

According to a new report from CareerBuilder and Economic Modeling Specialists, a record three million Americans are employed as temporary workers. This is up by 28% between 2010 and 2013. If a temporary employee works in California, Florida, Massachusetts, Oregon, or Minnesota, he or she has a much higher risk of getting injured on the job than a permanent employee based on a recent analysis of workers' compensation data by the nonprofit news organization ProPublica. That same analysis concluded that temps in Minnesota have the highest risk potential, with 72% having a greater chance of being injured on the job than permanent workers.

While some people might consider their dream job one that's "to die for," nobody really wants a job so badly that they're willing to sacrifice their life. This is why HR needs to work closely with their company's safety department. The two, in fact, should be inseparable for ensuring an employee's well-being.

As is often the case, HR departments may mistakenly assume that temporary employees either already have sufficient safety training from a previous job, or that they received safety training from a staffing firm. This couldn't be further from the truth as most safety training is learned on a specific jobsite and not in a classroom. Once temps get to a brand new job location, they are ill-prepared for the dangers they may face. For example, a manager in a factory needs additional help with a particular task. That manager takes a temporary worker who's been assigned to a low-hazard duty and places him or her into a potentially catastrophic situation with dangerous equipment, harmful chemicals, or an environment that requires protective gear, which the employee doesn't have.

Temporary workers are a necessary part of doing business and they can be just as qualified as their permanent counterparts. While it may be tempting to restrict what they should be allowed to do, all companies would be better served if they observed best safety practices in the workplace. HR departments should ensure that all temps have the necessary technical and safety training for any potential task they may undertake while working at that organization. If necessary, they should be included in routine safety classes and daily briefings and company-supplied protective equipment should always be provided regardless of whether the temporary employee brings their own.

What Makes Wellness Work?

Lisa Weston, CWC, CWPC
Director of Employee Wellness Promotion
the bagnall company, a UBA Partner Firm

More than 75 cents of every health care dollar spent in the United States goes toward treating chronic diseases such as arthritis, asthma, cancer, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Because these conditions are the number one cause of death and disability, and consequently the primary factor in rising health care costs, moving toward prevention-based care will be the key that helps both employers and employees pull health care costs back from the edge of crisis over the long term.

According to the 2013 UBA Health Plan Survey of nearly 11,000 employers, 19.2% of all insurance plans offer some sort of wellness program. Health risk assessments remain the most popular offering, with 81% of plans participating, 62.3% of plans offering incentive awards (a 3.1% decrease), and 61.3% offering a physical exam (a 1.1% decrease). The programs that saw the biggest increase were coaching at 56.2% (a 4.9% increase) and online wellness portals at 54.7% (a 4.7% increase).

The questions are whether comprehensive wellness programs are effective and how are results measured?

Whether or not a wellness program is effective depends on many factors, and most importantly, on the organization's goals. Typically, a wellness program is trying to increase employee engagement and productivity, while lowering long-term costs.

For all employers with wellness programs, the goal is to meet the needs of the employees to change their overall health. In order to measure effectiveness, keep track of everything. Track participation in all events, onsite education, and challenges. Track cost per person, and most importantly, total population participation. Track progress and participation from year to year to see the overall impact of the program. Also, develop the wellness program around the medical claims trends. If available, use health risk assessment data and biometric data, as well.

How wellness programs influence productivity is difficult to measure, but not impossible. Return on investment of wellness programs related to worker productivity can be determined primarily with the utilization of an employee health risk assessment that addresses the following four areas:

1. Absenteeism (work time missed): Percentage of work time missed due to health problems or a specific condition.
2. Presenteeism (reduced on-the-job effectiveness): Percentage of impairment while working due to health problems or a specific condition.
3. Work productivity loss (absenteeism plus presenteeism): Percentage of overall work impairment due to health problems or a specific condition.
4. Activity impairment (other than work): Percentage of activity impairment due to health problems or a specific condition.

Implementing a health risk assessment and having employees self-report how their health problems or specific conditions affect these four areas will provide employers with a method to determine the impact wellness has on productivity. Furthermore, the utilization of the health risk assessment allows for employers to obtain aggregate reporting specific to productivity and participation.

Unfortunately, not all employers wish to implement a health risk assessment campaign. Without having health risk assessment data available, determining the impact wellness has on productivity is very difficult.

As previously mentioned, the key to finding value in developing a wellness program is ensuring the program has offerings and programs in which employees actually want to participate. Careful planning is essential.  Employers must assess employee's needs with a health risk assessment or biometric data and also assess their wants with interest and incentive surveys. The question each employer should ask themselves is "What target am I trying to hit?" Then they should plan their program accordingly.

For further information about wellness trends, download a copy of the 2013 UBA Health Plan Survey Executive Summary.