Some employees now have access to free courses as the “unemployment rate continues to soar and the future of work remains uncertain.”

By: Kathryn Mayer | June 25, 2020 • 3 min read

Postmates is turning to a new benefit to help some of its workers during the coronavirus pandemic: free educational assistance.

The food-delivery company says it’s partnering with online education provider edX to provide employees with access to education certificates and virtual career guidance, for free, as part of its COVID-19 relief efforts. The benefit is being offered to Postmates Fleet, a workforce of independent contractors who deliver on behalf of Postmates, the company says.

The benefit includes access to more than 2,800 courses on a variety of topics, as well as a list of 25 curated courses in which employees previously expressed interest, via an internal survey. The goal is to “provide them with transferable skills and preparedness needed in a time when the unemployment rate continues to soar and the future of work remains uncertain,” the company says.

“In response to the COVID pandemic, edX is a perfect way to provide virtual opportunities for growth and learning as we navigate these uncertain times,” says Rachel Kamen, Postmates community engagement coordinator. “[The benefit] allows us to not only reach learners in all communities, but also provides access to quality courses from top-tier institutions—widening the opportunity for long-term economic security.”

Kamen says more than 100 Fleet members currently are participating in a wide variety of edX courses, and the company is “continuing to engage our Fleet to enroll.” She says the company plans to continue to offer the benefit for free post-pandemic.

Kamen says an internal survey found that many gig workers were interested in upward mobility and educational opportunities, but didn’t have access to them.

“In a job landscape that was already quickly evolving, COVID-19 has now added even more pressure on Americans to future-proof their careers and attain job security as the market gets more competitive.”

A number of employers have been turning to benefits to help employees through the pandemic. Telemedicine, mental health, one-time bonuses, financial wellbeing, paid leave and more have been a focus of employers. But education benefits, says edX co-CEO Adam Medros, are a perk employers should also consider, especially considering the fragility of the job market.

“The economic impact of the pandemic has put Americans under enormous financial strain, with many people losing jobs, getting furloughed or facing pay cuts,” he says. “In a job landscape that was already quickly evolving, COVID-19 has now added even more pressure on Americans to future-proof their careers and attain job security as the market gets more competitive.”

Related: 8 benefits employers should zero in on during the COVID-19 pandemic

Medros says he’s seen an uptick in employers adding or considering education benefits for workers in light of the pandemic.

“Companies are recognizing that the reality of social distancing and remote work is likely to stick around longer than anticipated, and they want to best set up their workforce for success,” he says. “Although learning and development budgets can be the first to go in an economic downturn, [an education benefit is] actually one of the smartest things you can do for your workforce. It keeps them engaged, learning relevant skills and can boost morale.”

***** ***** ***** ***** ***** 

Source: Human Resource Executive (HRE)

https://hrexecutive.com/why-postmates-is-turning-to-education-benefit-as-part-of-covid-relief/

Earlier this year, back before the coronavirus upended the world economy, New Zealander Andrew Barnes was promoting a book he co-authored that extols the benefits of the four-day workweek. The concept had been gathering steam after Barnes' company, Perpetual Guardian, as well as Microsoft Japan, made headlines announcing how such a schedule boosted productivity and increased employee satisfaction. Employers in a tight war for talent paid attention—until the pandemic and subsequent recession changed the conversation.

Now the idea is back, though for very different reasons. New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern suggested that a four-day workweek could boost the country's economy. She believes that if individuals use long weekends to visit local spots, the activity could compensate for the lack of foreign travelers in a country that's heavily dependent on tourism. Meanwhile, a group of economists used editorials in papers such as The New York Times to promote the idea of using the four-day workweek to reopen the economy. They proposed that after working for four days, people should quarantine for 10 days, thereby providing people with at least part-time employment and giving any coronavirus symptoms time to become apparent before they return to work. This way, individuals could earn a living while lowering the chance of transmitting the virus.

Some employers are using the four-day workweek as a cost-saving device. In May, journalists at the Los Angeles Times agreed to such a plan, with a commensurate 20 percent reduction in pay for three months to save money for the struggling paper. Stanley Black & Decker also cut some workers' schedules to four days as part of overall cost-saving efforts, which also included salary cuts and layoffs at the New Britain, Conn.-based toolmaker.

The pandemic will ultimately push more companies to adopt the abbreviated work schedule, according to Barnes, co-author of The 4 Day Week (Piatkus, 2020) and founder of Perpetual Guardian, which manages trusts, wills and estate planning. He notes that employers were forced to become more adaptable to keep their businesses running amid the outbreak, including allowing individuals to work from home even if company leaders didn't relish the idea. Barnes says having seen that alternative schedules didn't destroy ethics or productivity, these leaders will be more open to new ways of working.

"It will be a progression," he says. "The four-day week is clearly the better way to go."

Barnes decided to try a four-day week at Perpetual Guardian in 2018 after reading an article in The Economist that said office workers were only productive about two hours a day. "People aren't cognizant of how much time is wasted during the day," he says.

Companies have been slow to adopt new schedules in the U.S., where the five-day, 40-hour workweek is a nearly century-old tradition. Some attempts have been unsuccessful, and instituting such a change could be difficult in industries such as hospitality and retail. But four-day pioneers say the system has been effective, and experts predict that more companies will jump on board to keep flexibility-loving Millennials and Generation Z employees happy.

The Corporate Holy Grail?

Killer Visual Strategies, a Seattle-based communications agency, put an unorthodox twist on solving the common business challenge of employee fatigue resulting from a company growth spurt. Yes, it hired extra staff, but it also cut the workweek to four days.

"We saw people expressing signs of burnout," says Josh Miles, the agency's president and chief creative officer. "We want to make sure we're taking care of our employees mentally and physically. The four-day week gives people more time to decompress. They come back to work more refreshed."

The change, which was introduced in 2017, had an unexpected benefit. Productivity increased by roughly 20 percent. "That wasn't our goal," says Miles, adding that retention also got a boost. "We just wanted to retain employees and minimize burnout."

The shortened schedule also was a boon during the pandemic. "Our four-day workweek better equipped us for the abrupt shift to fully remote work as our team has years of experience with a flexible work situation and, as such, are quite capable of doing their work from home," he says. "It took our business one, maybe two days to feel fully confident in our transition to an entirely remote work environment."

Creating work environments where employees are healthy, loyal and productive may be the ultimate corporate hat trick. Any strategy that comes even close to achieving that lofty goal is bound to attract attention. Microsoft Japan's announcement last year that employee productivity rose 40 percent during a test of a four-day week grabbed headlines around the world. Interest picked up again at the end of last year when speculation abounded that Finland's newly elected prime minister, Sanna Marin, would institute a nationwide abbreviated workweek in the Scandinavian country.

     

An increasing understanding of how stress can negatively affect workers' health and productivity is another reason employers may be open to exploring the four-day option. Millennials' desire for more-flexible schedules is also a factor. And employers that take the plunge may find that the four-day workweek improves the bottom line. Companies that used such a schedule saved a total of 92 billion pounds ($120 billion) as operating costs dropped, absenteeism fell and productivity rose, according to a 2019 study of 500 British business leaders by the Henley Business School at the University of Reading in England.

The Eight-Hour Myth

Employers often bog down staff with unnecessary e-mails and meetings that keep them from accomplishing strategic goals. For example, employees spend 1 1/2 hours a day dealing with e-mails. Workers also have their own ways to drain the day. Their two biggest time-stealing activities are checking social media and reading news online, which take up about two hours per day, according to a study conducted in 2017 by Vouchercloud.com, a British discount shopping site. It found that employees are productive, on average, for two hours and 23 minutes a day. Barnes says his employees greatly reduced their time-wasting activities at work when given the option of working fewer hours, which boosted overall productivity significantly.

Considering the two greatest time-sucking options weren't even available when the 40-hour workweek was started nearly 100 years ago, it's easy to see why some companies may abandon the practice. In 1924, automotive tycoon Henry Ford adopted a 40-hour workweek because he thought his employees would buy more cars if they had more leisure time. (Many worked 50 hours a week or more previously.) Other employers followed suit, and the eight-hours-a-day, Monday-through-Friday schedule was born.

Much has changed in 96 years, leading many business experts to say it's time to rethink that schedule—at least for employees in the knowledge-based economy. Professionals such as software developers, architects, engineers and physicians rely on deep thinking to carry out their jobs, and experts say it's difficult to maintain such concentration for eight hours a day.

"Forty hours isn't some kind of a natural law," says Natalie Nagele, co-founder and chief executive officer of Wildbit, a virtual software company where employees work a four-day, 32-hour week. "I don't think 40-hour weeks are productive. Give employees space to do their work. Don't micromanage them. Don't harass them. Don't make them go to unnecessary meetings. They'll get more done in four hours than eight."

Still, it's difficult for companies to leave behind such an ingrained part of American culture. After World War II, the economy blossomed. Purchasing power became a status symbol, and men began to identify themselves with their jobs more than before, says Benjamin Hunnicutt, a professor at the University of Iowa who studies work and leisure time. "Work became the center of male identity," says the author of the recently released The Age of Experiences: Harnessing Happiness to Build a New Economy (Temple University Press, 2020). "We went from working to live to living to work."

As women entered the workforce in greater numbers, they also labored for long hours to prove they were as ambitious and capable as men. Both genders believed that becoming part of the office furniture would save them from layoffs when companies were forced to cut back.

Andrew Barnes is the author of The 4 Day Week where he makes the case that businesses can shorten the traditional five day working week while maintaining peak productivity and employees’ existing rates of pay. The result, according to Andrew, is a future in which we work less, but are both more productive and satisfied. In this episode of SHRM’s All Things Work podcast, Andrew talks with host Tony Lee about the steps he took to successfully implement the four-day week at his own company and what the change has meant to his 240 employees.

Please subscribe to All Things Work on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, Spotify, Stitcher, TuneIn or wherever you listen to podcasts. Check out SHRM.org/podcasts to listen on your desktop. And be sure to rate and review the show on Apple Podcasts or on your podcatcher of choice.

Keep up with SHRM by visiting the website, liking our Facebook page, checking us out on LinkedIn, and following us on Twitter and Instagram.

Old Habits Die Hard

Some companies compress the standard 40 hours of work into four days, while others simply lop off one day and require four eight-hour days, usually with no cut in pay. Only 15 percent of U.S. organizations offer four-day workweeks of 32 hours or less to all employees for all or part of the year, according to a 2019 employee benefits report by the Society for Human Resource Management.

There are numerous reasons employers may want to consider the concept. For example, they are paying far more attention to employees' mental health than ever before and understand the importance of giving workers enough time to relax. A study of 1,500 employees by San Francisco-based nonprofit Mind Share Partners found that 60 percent of respondents said their productivity at work was affected by their mental health, and more than one-third thought their work or workplace environment contributed to their symptoms.

Millennials, now the largest generational sector in the workforce, say a flexible schedule is very important to them. In fact, 22 percent say they want to leave their jobs soon because of a lack of work/life balance, according to a 2019 survey by Deloitte.

"The Millennial generation seems to have a different set of values," Hunnicutt says. "We're moving to a post-material economy. People value intangible experiences more than things, and they need time for the experiences." Generation Z employees, who are just starting to enter the workplace, are equally interested in more-flexible work schedules, research shows.

Many companies are experimenting with different kinds of flexible options, such as a condensed workday and telecommuting, to give employees more free time. Nagele says shortened days would pose challenges for her firm because employees work in different time zones and there wouldn't be enough overlap among them for collaboration. Others say the prospect of a three-day weekend is especially attractive to employees. "Giving people a day off is a massive incentive for them to be more productive," Barnes says.

'What you’re really saying to people [is] I am going to give you something that you cannot put a price on, it’s that precious. It’s more time. More time to do whatever you want. And all you have to do is rethink how you do things.' 
– Andrew Barnes

Taking the Risk

That's what the co-founders of The Slumber Yard believed when they piloted a four-day, 40-hour workweek for two months in 2018. "The staff was initially super-excited," says Matt Ross, co-founder and chief operating officer of the Las Vegas-based company that reviews mattresses. "We thought we hit a home run."

After the novelty wore off, however, employees spent the first 45 minutes of the day chatting, reading the news and eating breakfast. By the end of eight hours, Internet surfing had spiked. And to make matters worse, employees' increased time at the office pushed the business's food budget up by $450 a month—a big tab for a company of 12 people. Productivity fell, and the plan was abandoned.

Ross says he didn't anticipate that employees would work for 10 straight hours. "We don't expect that in an eight-hour day—we have a pool table, a pingpong table, snacks," he says. "We know people need a break. There was just too much Web-surfing and coffee breaks."

Miles, meanwhile, says having employees work four 10-hour days has been a success for Killer Visual Strategies and that the key is letting employees determine their schedules and work locations. He notes that some will work from home for a few hours in the morning and maybe put in some evening time in the office. "We leave it up to the individuals to plan out their days however they see fit, with the caveat that they need to always be reachable via in person, phone or e-mail and that no deadlines are missed," he says.

Killer Visual Strategies is open five days a week, with some staff taking Mondays off and others taking Fridays off, so there's always someone in the office to address client needs. The three days when everyone works leave ample time for meetings and coordination among employees.

"There's no handbook on this," Miles says. "Every company has to figure it out for themselves."

At Wildbit, everyone takes Fridays off except for the six members of the billing and tech support team, who alternate between Mondays and Fridays. This way, someone is always on call. Two weeks every quarter are reserved for planning so employees know what's expected and when assignments are due.

"Employees have to be more intentional on how they spend their time," Nagele says, adding that new employees can be suspect of the arrangement. "I have to be the cheerleader," she says, "and say, 'Yes you can do this.' "

Theresa Agovino is the workplace editor for SHRM.

***** ***** ***** ***** ***** 

Source Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/all-things-work/Pages/four-day-workweek.aspx

The largest food delivery service in the US is accused of misclassifying workers

By Andrew J. Hawkins@andyjayhawk  | Jun 16, 2020, 5:34pm EDT

DoorDash, the high-flying food delivery startup, was sued by San Francisco’s district attorney Tuesday for alleged unfair business practices and worker misclassification. It was the latest legal challenge targeting a gig economy company in California since the passage of the state’s first-in-the-nation worker misclassification law.

In a statement, San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin accused DoorDash of “illegally” classifying its delivery workers as independent contractors when they are, in fact, employees. Boudin argues that misclassification hurts workers by contributing to rising income inequality and the shrinking of the middle class, and it hurts the public by forcing other companies that classify workers as employees to compete with DoorDash on an unfair playing field.

“MISCLASSIFYING WORKERS DEPRIVES THEM OF THE LABOR LAW SAFEGUARDS TO WHICH THEY ARE ENTITLED”

“Misclassifying workers deprives them of the labor law safeguards to which they are entitled, denying workers minimum wage and overtime pay, unemployment insurance and protection from discrimination, among other things,” Boudin said in a statement.

In the lawsuit, the district attorney alleges that DoorDash has run afoul of Assembly Bill 5, a law that enshrines the so-called “ABC test” for determining whether someone is a contractor or employee. The law officially went into effect on January 1st, but gig economy companies like Uber and Lyft have continued to lobby against it. DoorDash is helping fund Uber and Lyft’s effort to carve out gig economy businesses from AB5.

California’s attorney general recently filed a lawsuit against Uber and Lyft on similar grounds as Boudin’s suit against DoorDash. California Assembly member Lorena Gonzalez, the main sponsor of AB5, tweeted in support of Boudin’s lawsuit.

As the COVID-19 pandemic has forced restaurants to pause their sit-down service, many have become increasingly reliant on delivery platforms like DoorDash, as well as competitors Grubhub, Postmates, and Uber Eats. Uber Eats’ recently failed effort to acquire Grubhub only seems to have solidified DoorDash’s status as market leader.

DoorDash, the largest meal-delivery company in the US, has seen its sales increase as a result of the lockdown. The company is reportedly close to securing new funding that would value it at more than $15 billion before the infusion, according to MarketWatch. DoorDash filed to go public in February, shortly before the novel coronavirus upended the economy and financial markets, and it’s still aiming for a listing this year.

Much like other gig economy companies, DoorDash argues that many of its couriers (which it calls “Dashers”) aren’t delivering food full time, but are actually doing it in their spare time as a way to earn extra money. Classifying them as employees would negatively affect their ability to hold multiple jobs, as well as harm restaurants’ ability to stay in business during the pandemic, the company argues.

“Today’s action seeks to disrupt the essential services Dashers provide,” Max Rettig, DoorDash’s global head of public policy, said in a statement, “stripping hundreds of thousands of students, teachers, parents, retirees and other Californians of valuable work opportunities, depriving local restaurants of desperately needed revenue, and making it more difficult for consumers to receive prepared food, groceries, and other essentials safely and reliably.”

DoorDash is no stranger to controversy. The company got in trouble last year when it was revealed that it was pocketing some customer tips to cover base pay for deliveries. After an uproar, DoorDash said it would change the policy so that couriers would receive 100 percent of tips.

More recently, a viral story about a pizzeria owner buying his own inventory from DoorDashat a profit cast a negative light on the company’s business model of subsidizing some food deliveries.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source; The Verge

https://www.theverge.com/2020/6/16/21293474/doordash-sf-district-attorney-lawsuit-worker-misclassification

JUNE 16, 2020

Tech salary benchmarks and how remote work is impacting talent preferences

Each year, Hired combs through hundreds of thousands of interview requests and job offers to provide the single most comprehensive view of tech salaries ever produced. For this report, we analyzed salaries for software engineers, product managers, DevOps engineers, designers, and data scientists, to empower both companies and candidates with real salary benchmarks they can rely on.

In normal times, the end result is an accurate salary roadmap for tech companies and talent—trendline they can follow for the year to come.

Of course, these are not normal times.

Against the backdrop of COVID-19, techHQ’s are closed, work from home is the “new normal,” Amazon and Netflix usage is soaring, well known tech unicorns like Uber, Lyft, and Airbnb are laying off thousands, and Facebook is floating company wide adjusted salaries based on cost of living in exchange for the ability to work remotely. Put simply, it is still too early to tell whether the 2020 tech salary trendline will stay steady or forever be divided into “before” and“after” COVID-19. What we do know is that as companies and tech talent navigate this new normal, it’s more essential than ever to remove the stigma around salary discussions and promote transparency.

In that context, we present our first ever two-part State of Salaries report:

Part 1: Where we were before COVID-19
Hired’s proprietary career marketplace data reveals tech salary trends heading into 2020

Part 2: The next chapter: Now and where we’re headed
Survey data from 2,300 tech workers about the future of work and their compensation

Part 1: Before COVID-19

Quick Shares:

1. Tech salaries grew in every major market last year, with a US market average of $146k and a global average of $130k.
2. Austin and Toronto led the tech world in salary growth, as each saw a 10% increase last year.
3. SF Bay Area still boasts the highest pay in tech, with an average salary of $155k, a 7% increase
   over the previous year.
4. Seattle had the most modest salary increase at 3%, but still ranks third for highest average salaries, behind only New York and SF Bay Area.
5. Tech salaries in the healthcare sector are skyrocketing, with an average salary of $151k in the US and £68k ($87k) in the UK.

SALARY TRENDS BY MARKET
Roaring into the 20’s

Whether salary trends continue or the pandemic creates a “new normal,” Hired data from the 2019 calendar year paints a clear picture of widespread growth in the salaries offered to tech talent. From San Francisco to London, software engineers to data scientists, everyone working in tech saw steady gains and had every reason to look forward to more of the same in 2020.

San Francisco still reigned supreme with a 7%YoY growth and an average of $155k. Seattles showed signs of slowing with just 3% salary growth—but remained the 3rd highest paying city.

Austin and Toronto led the tech world in salary growth

Tech salaries in the healthcare industry are healthier than ever

Salary growth for specific tech roles

Tech talent continues to be core to a company’s operating system, driving value for innovative businesses and their compensation reflects that. We took a look at salaries specific to product management, software engineering, design and data science roles and found that salaries increased last year in every category in both the US and the UK.

In the US, data science roles saw the largest salary increase, jumping from $128k to $139k- although it’s worth noting that reflects are bound from a slight dip in 2018, when salaries went down to $128k from $135k. And while software engineering roles are most often known for commanding top dollar, this year product management salaries surpassed them with an average salary of $154K compared to$146K in 2018. In the UK, software engineering and design roles saw the largest salary gains this year, increasing by £6k to £67k and £57k respectively.

ADJUSTED FOR COST OF LIVING
How far does your money go?

As more companies contemplate the adoption of permanent remote work policies, the age-old calculation comes up, ”If I can move to Denver, but keep my San Francisco salary…” Although this may become a reality for some, there are early signs that this won’t be the case. Big tech has already begun laying the groundwork for their remote compensation philosophies when in May, Facebook revealed that starting in 2021, “employees may have their compensation adjusted based on their new locations,” if they plan to relocate and work remotely.

So, the question becomes: How much further do average tech salaries stretch in other cities compared to San Francisco?

While SF Bay Area talent is paid generously, it is often justified by the high cost of living they experience as well. To answer the question above, our analysis to the right considers key cost of living factors including rent, real estate, utilities, groceries, local taxes and transportation for SF and applies that to the average salary in different tech cities

So, even though you may be earning a bigger paycheck living in the SF Bay Area, your money will go significantly further in cities like Austin and Denver where your adjusted salary becomes $224K and $202K respectively.

SALARY EQUITY
Racial bias and ageism: We have work to do

Despite the overall salary gains we saw in our 2019 data, there were still substantial gaps between white tech professionals and their Black and Hispanic counterparts, suggesting that existing Diversity, Equity and Inclusion initiatives aren’t making a meaningful impact. The salaries offered to black candidates, while significantly higher than in previous years, were still the lowest of any racial group and $10k less on average than those offered to white candidates. Perhaps even more discouraging is the fact that both Black and Hispanic candidates continue to expect lower salaries than their white counterparts. When a candidate creates a Hired profile, they’re required to include a preferred salary based on the skills and role they are seeking, and we found that Black and Hispanic candidates list a preferred salary that’s $9k and $4k less, respectively.

To explore more insights on the wage gap, click here

Ageism in the tech industry

In addition to the upsetting differences in salaries offered to Black and Hispanic candidates, our data shows that salaries of candidates over the age of 45 become stagnant and often decline.

Part 2 :The Next Chapter: Now and Where We’re Headed

Quick Shares:

1. Nearly one third of tech talent would be willing to accept a reduced salary if their employer made work from home permanent. Over half (55%) would not.
2. Half of tech talent want to return to their office “at least once a week” post-COVID, but only 7% report wanting to work there every day.
3. 90% of tech talent believe the same job should receive the same pay, regardless of remote work, but, when factoring in cost of living, 40% say they support location adjustments.
4. More than half (53%) of tech workers said permanent work from home would make them “likely” or “very likely” to move to a city with a lower cost of living.
5. Tech talent is split on job security, with 42% concerned, and 58% not concerned, that they are going to be laid off in the next 6 months.

JOB SECURITY
Maintaining cautious confidence

While the rest of the world wrestles with an uncertain future, there has been no shortage of articles proclaiming that big tech is not just surviving, but thriving in a time of COVID-19. Of course, the realities on the ground are a bit more complex. Based on our survey results, tech talent is split on job security, with 42% concerned, and 58% not concerned, that they are going to be laid off in the next 6 months.

They’re also divided on how confident they are in finding their next opportunity. When asked how strongly they agree with the statement ‘I want to leave my current job but am afraid to do so because I’m worried about finding another job,’ 39% of respondents strongly agree or agree, while 34% strongly disagree or disagree, and the remaining 27% neither agree nor disagree. And while fears of layoffs and furloughs pose as the worst case scenario for many in tech, the vast majority of tech talent do not expect their salaries to decrease in the next 6 months. In fact, nearly half (49%) of tech workers expect to receive a raise of up to 20% in the next 6 months, while 44% expect their salary to stay the same.

RELOCATION
Cost of living leads to wandering eyes

As work from home takes hold, tech companies and their workforces are contemplating the need for centralized HQ’s optimized for collaboration rather than heads down productivity. From the company side, the benefits of reduced overhead and access to a larger, more diverse talent pool are clear, and many think that workers are itching to leave expensive urban centers in search of lower costs of living. Our data suggests that may not be the case. When asked how much longer talent expects to stay in their current city, 31% say they have no intention of ever leaving, and 64% plan to say for another 3 years at least. For those thinking of  leaving, cost of living is the 2nd most cited factor after a desire to “experience a new city.”

That said, if you ask talent how permanent work from home would impact their desire to seek out a lower cost of living, we see a shift from many who were not likely to leave any time soon, with more than 53% stating they would be more likely to make that move.

We wanted to gain a better understanding of where tech talent would consider relocating to, so we asked them to write in the city they’re most interested in rather than giving them a list of options to mitigate any potential bias. Interestingly—and despite concerns about cost of living—we saw the longstanding, expensive tech hubs come up again and again.

REMOTE SALARY PREFERENCES
Pay should be adjusted, but not for me

In the most general sense, tech talent is nearly unanimous in its belief that the same job should be equally compensated, regardless of work from home status. But in the current climate, Facebook is making early moves to establish a remote compensation philosophy that aligns with a different approach by announcing plans to make “cost of living” adjustments to salaries across the board. Taken in the abstract, support (or lack thereof) for adjusted salaries is spread fairly evenly: with ~40% supporting and ~40% against.

So, tech workers agree that people should be paid the same wages for the same work, but they’re more split on the idea of cost of living adjustments—what happens if we bring the question to their doorstep? How many would be willing to accept a lower salary if their employer moved permanently towards work from home?

Our insights revealed that there is far less of a split, although notable that 32% of respondents said they would be willing to accept a lower salary to work remotely. Similarly, if they were starting a new job with a company that allowed them to work 100% remote, two-thirds (67%) of tech professionals’ salary expectations would not change, while a third (33%) said they would.

And, most tellingly, over 60% of those interviewed said that they would immediately start looking for a new job (or even quit) if they were denied a raise or if their salary decreased in the next 6 months.

And if employers think they can dangle more equity and stock options to convince a candidate to accept a lower base salary, they may want to think again. Our most recent Brand Health Report found that base salary is the most important factor in a candidate’s decision to accept a job, and that seems to ring true today, as tech talent are divided on what salary sacrifices they’re willing to make. 31% of tech professionals said they’d accept a lower base salary in exchange for stock in a publicly traded company and 21% said they’d take a lower salary for more equity in a  privately held company, but nearly half (48%) said they wouldn’t take a lower salary for either.

Rather than offering stock or equity, companies should consider upgrading their health, dental and vision benefits, which tech talent ranked as the number one most compelling benefit beyond base salary. This was followed by unlimited PTO, paid parental leave, free childcare services, tuition reimbursement, free gym membership, and student loan assistance.

EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT
Retention tension

While the majority of tech professionals we spoke with wouldn’t take a pay cut to work remotely full time, we found that 57% would be willing to forgo added compensation equal to in-office perks like, free lunch and fitness classes, but the remaining 43% would expect that added compensation.

As far as how tech talent want to work in a post-COVID world, a third of the tech professionals we surveyed want to work remotely regardless of where they’re located, while 11% want to work remotely, but only in the same time zone as their team or company. On the flip side, a full half of tech professionals want to work from the office at least one day a week, while just 7% want to work exclusively from the office. When explicitly asked if they want to return to the office post-COVID, 35% of respondents said they’d rather work remotely full-time, while 56% said they want to be in the office 2-3 times a week, and the remaining 9% want to be in the office full-time.

All of this indicates that while most tech professionals are comfortable continuing with remote work to some  degree, many of them still value having an office to return to on their own terms. That’s why we’re likely to see companies embrace remote work in the way it works best for their business and workforce, and that’s going to vary depending on their unique needs. Some companies may decide to have certain teams come into the office once a month for in-person collaboration and work remotely otherwise. Others may opt to build distributed teams, but have them operate in the same time zone. It’s all about finding the right balance for your business, and clearly communicating your remote work policies to employees.

Conclusion

We firmly believe that transparency around salary data is critical for empowering tech talent to not only find a job they love, but to take that job knowing they are being compensated for the true value of their work. While last year was an undeniably big year for tech salary growth across the globe, it’s still unclear how the pandemic will impact salaries long-term, which makes publishing this report even more important.

As tech talent and companies navigate the new normal, we must continue to have meaningful, transparent conversations around salary and compensation—particularly with regards to how remote work will impact the shifting tide.

While tech talent have varying preferences on what style of remote work is best for them —be it working from home while having access to an office or being remote full time—it’s clear that COVID-19 has been a catalyst for the wider adoption of remote work across the board. What’s less clear is how willing they are to take a pay cut to do so, and how their expectations will evolve. As a first step, companies should prioritize not only solidifying their remote work policies but taking the time to define how they plan to approach compensation in a more remote-centric world in order to attract and retain today’s top tech talent.

Although we are in the early days of this new chapter, and there’s inevitable uncertainty about how the tech industry will evolve in the years to come, one thing remains certain: the need for salary transparency. At Hired, we are committed to quantifying the ever-changing state of salaries in tech and hope that our dedication to data transparency will help job seekers and the world’s most innovative companies make more informed decisions as we strive to build a more equitable future.

Methodology

This report is based on Hired’s proprietary data from real job offers on the platform from companies to tech professionals, collected and analyzed by Hired’s data science team. For this report, we focused on tech talent in 11 markets and analyzed more than 425,000 interview requests and job offers facilitated through our marketplace during the last year, including more than 10,000 participating companies and 98,000 job seekers. Age and race data was collected through an optional demographics survey given to Hired candidates that is used only for aggregated research purposes and not shared with Hired clients. Where numbers have been adjusted to reflect cost of living in a certain market, we used data from the site Numbeo, which factors in things like rent and real estate prices, groceries, transportation, utilities, local taxes, and more. In addition to our proprietary data, we collected survey responses from more than 2,300 tech professionals across the globe on the Hired platform to better understand how COVID-19 has impacted their salary expectations, desire to work remotely, perception of job security, and more.

***** ***** ***** ***** ***** 

Source: Hired, Inc.

https://hired.com/blog/highlights/2020-state-of-salaries-report/

by: CNN Wire

Posted: Jun 13, 2020 / 07:04 AM PDT/ Updated: 

Jun 13, 2020 / 07:04 AM PDT  

Nike is adding June 19, a holiday called Juneteenth, to its list of official, paid company holidays.

The sportswear giant joins a growing number of companies that announced this week they are making Juneteenth, the oldest known US celebration of the end of slavery, an annual company holiday. Twitter, Square and Vox Media also plan to do the same.

Nike CEO John Donahoe made the announcement in a letter to employees Thursday, along with several other actions the company plans to take in light of nationwide demonstrations calling for racial justice.

The announcements came as President Donald Trump said Thursday he plans to return to the campaign trail on June 19. After intense criticism, he announced in a Friday night tweet that the rally would be rescheduled to June 20 “out of respect for this holiday.”

Juneteenth honors the day in 1865 on which, more than two years after the Emancipation Proclamation was issued, Union soldiers landed in Galveston, Texas, and announced the news of the proclamation to enslaved African Americans. That coastal area of Texas was the last to hear that the Civil War had endedtwo months earlier.

“At Nike, Inc., we aspire to be a leader in building a diverse, inclusive team and culture. We want to be better than society as a whole,” Donahoe said in the letter. He added that observing Juneteenth is an opportunity “to better commemorate and celebrate Black history and culture.”

Although Nike has relied on black athletes and talent to build and market its brand, Donahoe acknowledged that the company’s culture may not be as welcoming to black employees.

“As I have listened deeply during my first six months and over the past few weeks, what I have learned is that many have felt a disconnect between our external brand and your internal experience,” Donahoe said. “You have told me that we have not consistently supported, recognized and celebrated our own Black teammates in a manner they deserve. This needs to change.”

Companies’ acknowledgment of Juneteenth is a good first step, said Meredith Clark, an assistant professor of media studies at the University of Virginia.

“It is a nice symbolic gesture,” Clark said. “I’m never going to frown at a company recognizing a day that is culturally important to so many Americans, really to all of us. But at the same time I want to see that sort of action matched with commitment to changing the culture inside these organizations.”

In addition to other efforts, Donahoe said Nike’s board and executive team also plan to set targets for diversifying the company’s workforce, with a focus on increasing the number of black, Latinx and women employees. He said the company plans to regularly track and measure its progress, though he didn’t provide further specifics on how the initiative would be carried out.

The announcement follows a similar pledge by competitor Adidas this week to fill at least 30% of its new positions with black or Latinx workers.

***** ***** ***** ***** ***** 

Source: KTLA News

https://ktla.com/news/nationworld/nike-joins-companies-making-juneteenth-an-annual-paid-holiday/

When Will Life Return to Normal?

From battles on the front lines to social distancing from friends and family, COVID-19 has caused a massive shake-up of our daily lives.

After second-guessing everything from hugging our loved ones to delaying travel, there is one big question that everyone is likely thinking about: will we ever get back to the status quo? The answer may not be very clear-cut.

Today’s graphic uses data from New York Times’ interviews of 511 epidemiologists and infectious disease specialists from the U.S. and Canada, and visualizes their opinions on when they might expect to resume a range of typical activities.

Life in the Near Future, According to Experts

Specifically, this group of epidemiologists were asked when they might personally begin engaging in 20 common daily activities again.

The responses, based on the latest publicly available and scientifically-backed data, varied based on assumptions around local pandemic response plans. The experts also noted that their answers would change depending on potential treatments and testing rates in their local areas.

Here are the activities that a majority of professionals see starting up as soon as this summer, or within a year’s time:

	This summer	3-12 months	+1 year	Never again
Bring in mail without precautions	64%	16%	17%	3%
‍⚕️ See a doctor for a non-urgent appointment	60%	29%	11%	<1%
Vacation overnight within driving distance	56%	26%	18%	<1%
‍♂️ Get a haircut at a salon or barber shop	41%	39%	19%	1%
Attend a small dinner party	32%	46%	21%	<1%
Hike or picnic outdoors with friends	31%	41%	27%	<1%
Send kids to school, camp, or day care	30%	55%	15%	<1%
Work in a shared office	27%	54%	18%	1%
Send children on play dates	23%	47%	29%	1%
Ride a subway or a bus	20%	40%	39%	1%
Visit elderly relative or friend in their home	20%	41%	39%	<1%
✈️ Travel by airplane	20%	44%	37%	<1%
️ Eat at a dine-in restaurant	16%	56%	28%	<1%
️ Exercise at a gym or fitness studio	14%	42%	40%	4%

The urge to be outdoors is pretty clear, with 56% of those surveyed hoping to take a road trip before the summer is over. Meanwhile, 31% felt that they would be able to go hiking or have a picnic with friends this summer, citing the need for “fresh air, sun, socialization and a healthy activity” to help keep on top of their physical and mental health during this time.

Public transport and travel of any form is one aspect that has been put on hold, whether it’s by plane, train, or automobile. Many of the surveyed epidemiologists also lamented the strain the pandemic has had on relationships, as evidenced by the social situations they hope to restart sooner rather than later.

The worst casualty of the epidemic is the loss of human contact.

—Eduardo Franco, McGill University

On the other hand, there are certain activities that they considered too risky to engage in for the time-being. A large share are putting off attending celebrations such as weddings or concerts for at least a year or more, out of perceived social responsibility.

	This summer	3-12 months	+1 year	Never again
⚰️ Attend a wedding or a funeral	17%	41%	42%	<1%
Hug or shake hands when greeting a friend	14%	39%	42%	6%
Go out with someone you don't know well	14%	42%	42%	2%
Attend a church or other religious service	13%	43%	43%	2%
Stop routinely wearing a face covering	7%	40%	52%	1%
Attend a sporting event, concert, or play	3%	32%	64%	1%

Perhaps the most surprising finding is that 6% of epidemiologists do not expect to ever hug or shake hands as a post-pandemic greeting. On top of this, over half consider masks necessary for at least the next year.

The Virus Sets the Timeline

Of course, these estimates are not meant to represent every situation. The experts also practically considered whether certain activities were avoidable or not—such as one’s occupation—which affects individual risk levels.

The answers [about resuming these activities] have nothing to do with calendar time.

—Kristi McClamroch, University at Albany

While many places are trickling out of lockdown and re-opening to support the economy, some officials are still warning against prematurely lifting restrictions before we fully have a handle on the virus and its spread.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Visual Capitalist

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/life-return-to-normal-covid-19/

To improve retention, understand what's driving employees away

By Stephen Miller, CEBS   |   June 3, 2020

Times are stressful for employees and employers alike. But while many industries are struggling, others—maybe your competitors—are hiring. If one of your employees is offered a job somewhere else, it may be worth extending a counteroffer. But employers should understand that, if the offer doesn't address what's driving an employee to leave, it isn't likely to keep that employee onboard for good.

A high retention rate can be financially beneficial to an employer. Each departure costs about one-third of that worker's annual earnings, according to the Work Institute, a Franklin, Tenn.-based employee retention and engagement firm.

A recent study by job-search firm LiveCareer asked 212 hiring managers about counteroffers. According to survey respondents:

• Employees reject counteroffers 35 percent of the time. 
  

• Small companies with fewer than 50 employees are more likely to make counteroffers.
  

• 39 percent of hiring managers believe that employees are more engaged after accepting a counteroffer, and 25 percent believe extending counteroffers decreases performance.
  

• 65 percent of employees who accept a counteroffer stay with the company for at least another two years.
  
  

The survey also delved into what incentives hiring managers were offering to keep valued employees onboard, as shown below.

Career Growth Drives Retention

"HR professionals should keep in mind what incentives are important and persuasive to employees," said Joe Mercurio, a member of the communications team at LiveCareer. When a raise isn't possible, effective counteroffer incentives include  promotion, role transition, and better schedule, he pointed out.

Further evidence that retention isn't driven by pay alone comes from survey findings released in April by the Work Institute. The consultancy's 2020 Retention Report analyzed data from over 233,000 employees from 2010 through 2019, including 34,312 employees who quit their job last year.

"One out of every five employees who chose to accept a new job with a different employer in 2019 was because of career development concerns," noted William Mahan, sales operations manager at the firm.

Employees leave "because they want to learn, grow and be challenged in their roles at work. If not challenged, they will find a job where they will be," he said.

A counteroffer that doesn't address those concerns isn't likely to retain employees eying a competitor's offer—or to keep them happy for long if they choose to stay.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/compensation/pages/counteroffers-should-address-more-than-pay.aspx

Separating rating and pay decisions may offer employers some legal protection.

By: Tom Starner | June 11, 2020 • 3 min read

As COVID-19’s impact on the market and workplaces lingers on, companies are facing a range of unprecedented questions. Among them: What should we do with performance management? And should performance link to pay for this year?

Lori Holsinger, senior principal with Mercer in Atlanta, explains that these are logical questions because, for more than a decade, at least 85% of companies have been linking performance and pay decisions, and 70% of companies link the two by assigning performance ratings, according to Mercer’s 2019 Global Performance Management Study.

“Some proactive companies have already taken action to separate rating and pay decisions until the pandemic is contained and the market stabilizes,” she says.

From a legal perspective, decoupling traditional pay and performance decisions during the pandemic may help employers mitigate future wrongful-termination cases due to poor performance.

Typically, she says, an employer strengthens its position by maintaining a track record over time of employee-employer feedback discussions, adequate training and coaching, and documentation to support termination due to poor performance. Holsinger says this “track record” becomes even more critical the longer the tenure of the employee.

“Companies that are automatically assigning ‘meets’ or ‘exceeds’ ratings during COVID-19 may be inadvertently increasing their future risk for wrongful-termination cases due to poor performance,” she says.

Holsinger says that, in what would be considered normal times, employers set performance goals and expectations that define how a given role will contribute to the team and company’s success, based on historical data for the company, team and role. The process helps establish the baseline for the role and set performance targets that are realistic, clarifying what meeting and exceeding expectations looks like.

“With COVID-19, all these normal planning elements have gone out the window,” she says. “While some companies are thriving financially due to the pandemic, such as home-improvement businesses, gaming and beauty products, many other companies are struggling, particularly retail and hospitality.”

In addition, forces outside the employees’ and employers’ control are at play. With the anticipated “ping-pong ball” effect of openings, closures and modifications until the pandemic is contained, even setting modified expectations for the rest of the year is tricky, Holsinger says.

For example, imagine an employee that “got lucky” due to the pandemic’s positive financial impact on their role and team. Should this employee be rewarded more for their 2020 results? What about 2021, when businesses will begin to right-size? Should that same employee get “dinged” because their year-over-year results went significantly down from 2020 to 2021?

“On the flip side, should an employee that traditionally performs well be caught in the crosshairs of the pandemic and get a poor rating for 2020 due to something outside of their control?” she says.

Holsinger says some employers recognize they would rather send the message of acknowledging 2020 is an unusual year, which should be extracted from their pay-for-performance approach and handled completely differently.

“Many of these same companies see this as a temporary adjustment that is more fair, authentic and transparent with their employees,” she says.

***** ***** ***** ***** ***** 

Source: Human Resource Executive

https://hrexecutive.com/pay-and-performance-management-in-the-age-of-covid-19/

Lead the charge in the rapidly evolving landscape with employee experience, culture and work from home.

By: Nate Randall | June 16, 2020 • 4 min read

Human Resources departments have long gotten a bad rap. After talent acquisition handles an employee’s initial hiring and onboarding, it’s likely most interactions with our department are about things like employee issues, annual healthcare enrollment and dreaded performance reviews. Even worse, it’s commonly recognized that if an HR representative is present, someone’s job is probably at risk. Now more than ever, the challenges facing HR practitioners are deep and complex.

We may have gravitated toward a human resources career path because we are a “people person.” It’s likely that we and other HR professionals value interpersonal relationships and have a high EQ (emotional intelligence quotient). The world around us is rapidly changing. Interconnectedness is becoming more virtual and less in person. How is it that an industry rooted in human interaction has gained a reputation as the boogeyman, and what can we do to change it?

With the rise of self-serve performance management, healthcare enrollment and payroll processing systems, HR representatives’ roles have become more about pushing buttons and sending email reminders than engaging with colleagues. With the necessity and trend of working from home, we in HR risk becoming even more of a secret society and faceless name behind the corporate curtain. HR has continuously been asked to do more work with less staff, effectively removing the social impact of the HR function. 

As technology has created fewer reasons to engage with colleagues, it puts HR in a challenging spot. Although our department is given the responsibility for creating a great company culture, we may feel that we rarely have the time, budget or ability to influence it. 

It may seem impossible given everything we are tasked with, but there are some easy ways to integrate with our colleagues to improve HR’s reputation within the company. HR knows better than anyone that organizational change takes time. Below are both immediate and long-term ways to build your HR team to support your company’s culture through these unprecedented times.

1. Participate

The first step is to be present in the company you support. This means stepping out from behind the computer (figuratively) and actively participating in the day-to-day. 

Invite your colleagues from outside HR to a virtual lunch. Although it can sometimes feel like high school all over again, asking to “join the table” of a different department is a convenient way to socialize without adding any more time to your day. You’ll be surprised by what you learn listening to folks from various walks of life.

If you offer virtual health, wellbeing, fitness initiatives or employee resource groups, join them. If there’s a club that aligns with your interests, this is the perfect opportunity to socialize with colleagues and allow them to see you as more than a department representative. Those trendy new virtual Happy Hours? You should be there with a drink in hand. My experience as a participant has always been extremely valuable in enhancing existing programs.

2. Speak (and act) like a human

In HR, we have our own language. Abbreviations like COBRA, HIPAA, HSA and HCM abound. Although this can quickly convey information to those in our department, it will rarely mean anything to others in our company. Ensuring that we spell out words and explain what they mean in simplified language will make the conversation go more smoothly, rather than leaving them wondering “WTH is an FSA”?

Alexander Pope once penned, “To err is human, to forgive is divine.” Making mistakes is part of being human. But rarely are human resources allowed to make mistakes. When we do, our errors are amplified because they usually center around things that are intensely personal and impactful, such as employee benefits. Rightfully so, this can cause employees to have strong reactions.

Showing empathy, having the ability to apologize and being willing to find resolutions are essential skills for any good HR pro. Calming the emotional response of the other person by validating the way they feel goes a long way. After demonstrating empathy for their situation, an apology is the next logical step. Simply saying, “I’m sorry” can be sufficient, but it’s always best to repeat what we’re apologizing for, so the person feels heard. Fixing a mistake, or at the very least, making it right in some way is the critical end game. If we are unable to offer an immediate resolution, be sure to provide a follow-up date to help build trust, and then deliver. 

Another easy way to speak like a human and build trust is to ask for feedback. People love to share their opinion and all employee surveys are a key bridge-builder between HR and the organization. Questions can be as simple as, “What’s your favorite snack in your kitchen?” or something that requires a bit more thought like asking them to evaluate how they felt an HR interaction went. If we’re specific with our question, we’ll likely elicit a clear response. For example, “I’d love to know we can improve. How could we have explained our benefits in a way that made it clearer?” Additionally, we must be prepared to demonstrate change based on the feedback we receive. That will go a long way in building a culture of trust where employees feel their voices are heard. It may be obvious, but don’t ask anything you aren’t prepared to act upon. This can undermine the whole effort.

3. Hire for culture

One trend that is taking off in the world of human resources is hiring a designated person responsible for employee experience and culture. This person’s sole responsibility is to create an inclusive culture where colleagues have opportunities to strengthen relationships and feel delighted about their work experience. This person is often responsible for things like company food services, as well as developing and maintaining such employee programs as fitness, wellbeing, company events and other employee-led programs. 

“All companies are communities—and as with any community, they have distinct characteristics that define their DNA,” says Alex Shubat, CEO of culture tech company Espresa. “HR teams today have massive responsibilities, to not only maintain the top tier benefits of health and wealth but also the ideas and experiences that make multi-generational and global workforces feel a sense of place, community and culture. More than ever, company culture is helping to get us through some very tough times.” 

Designating a person to help boost employee culture in this time sends a strong message to employees that culture and employee experience are important to the organization. Having a person at every virtual and in-person event who can see and feel the culture and close the employee feedback loop only makes sense.

“That’s a huge ask and a ton of responsibility in an already constrained HR organization,” Shubat says. “With new culture-based technologies, HR now has the ability to enrich their vibrant cultures without the significant labor and minutia involved. Just because you have more and more free-range employees who are working from home, or wherever on the planet, they can still get a sense of connection to their culture—and that is where loyalty lives.” 

One thing is clear, the shifting focus and trend in human resources towards employee experience and culture are only going to continue to amplify as our work world changes and we navigate to the new normal. The best organizations will be prepared to meet the expectations of their employees and recruits by supporting a rich and vibrant employee experience focused culture, no matter where they are on the planet.

***** ***** ***** ***** ***** 

Source: Human Resource Executive

https://hrexecutive.com/3-ways-hr-can-support-company-culture-through-the-new-normal/

A federal judge ordered the commission to revisit its earlier 30% incentive limit.

AUTHOR Ryan Golden ||| PUBLISHED June 15, 2020

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) voted 2-1June 11 to move forward a proposed rulemaking that would allow only a "de minimis" financial incentive to encourage employee participation in wellness programs without violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Commissioner Victoria Lipnic said at the commission's public meeting Thursday that the rule would be submitted to the White House Office of Management and Budget for review, adding that "there are many steps to go in this process." Lipnic and Chair Janet Dhilllon, the EEOC's two Republican members, voted in favor of advancing the proposal while Commissioner Charlotte Burrows, the agency's lone Democrat, voted against.

The rulemaking follows a failed previous attempt to implement two similar rules in 2018 that the EEOC rescinded at the direction of a federal judge. The rules amended the ADA and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) to permit employers to use a penalty or incentive of up to 30% of the cost of self-only coverage to encourage participation in wellness programs that involved the disclosure of certain ADA- and GINA-protected information.

The AARP sued the commission, alleging that the level of incentives provided for in the rules was inconsistent with the "voluntary" standards of ADA and GINA (AARP v. EEOC, No. 16-2113 (D.D.C. Aug. 22, 2017)). A federal district court determined that EEOC had failed to provide a reasoned explanation for its decision to adopt the 30% incentive levels and remanded the rule for reconsideration.

EEOC drafted its latest proposal in response to the court's order, it confirmed in a June 11 statement. The rule will propose that employers, for most wellness programs, offer no more than "a de minimis incentive" to encourage participation and meet other requirements to comply with the ADA. But the rule would also permit certain wellness programs to offer the maximum allowed incentive under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act’s 2013 regulations.

The agency's public meeting saw objections to the rule from Burrows, who said the rule misreads the ADA by applying the law's "safe harbor" provision to employee wellness programs and raises concerns about how employers will collect and secure employees’ personal data.

"This rule carries unexpectedly high risks for the medical privacy of every employee in America," Burrows said. "I cannot support the rule in its current form."

Lipnic said she "respectfully disagreed" with Burrows' position on the application of the safe harbor provision, adding that the rule as drafted "does provide a solid basis to solicit comments." Dhillon said she "fully supported the rule as written."

If approved by the White House, the proposal will be published in the Federal Register and stakeholders will be able to submit comments.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

Source: HR Dive

https://www.hrdive.com/news/eeoc-to-propose-de-minimis-limit-on-wellness-program-incentives/579836/