The current round of cost cutting by the new coalition government will require public sector bodies to make tough decisions (see Cuts and Commitment: What Public Sector HR Has to Deliver). In normal situations you would expect leaders to use the rational decision-making model (define problem, identify and weight criteria, generate and rate options, make decision).

However, these are not normal times and the increasing pressure on bosses is likely to push them into behaving irrationally. As Roy Mogg says in his blog Leadership in a Crisis, leaders and leadership qualities are coming under intense scrutiny around the world. We need leaders who can manage a crisis and make decisions in an emergency. But are our leaders up to the job?

Our recent experience provides some alarming evidence.

One huge organisation brought the leadership team together to address its big issues – including a full-scale restructure and redundancies running into thousands. However, those present became so embroiled in how to raise money for a nominated charity, managers spent more than a third of the time trying to out do each other in the philanthropic stakes.

The energy and clarity of thought were there, but totally misdirected. Meanwhile huge business challenges were sidelined. So why the inertia? Is it denial? Or did that senior team seek comfort in the familiar, delaying painful decisions in the process?

A second organisation we know got themselves totally distracted in a board-level argument over a director’s expense claim amounting to 64p. While this was going on they took their eye off the ball and lost a major contract. The drop in turnover has led to widespread cost cutting and redundancies.

So a leader’s inaction can and will lead to a deterioration in an already bad situation. Rather than allowing themselves to become distracted or freeze like rabbits in the headlights, bosses need to get to grips with the situation and act like effective crisis leaders.

The Leadership Trust has outlined three essential ‘grips’ to help in just this situation:

1. Grip oneself to make decisions and take action under stress.
2. Grip the task to clarify and communicate the objective and purpose of the decisions and create strategies to pursue them.
3. Grip the team to empower people to manage the crisis and do what needs to be done.

In these difficult times leaders need robust decision-making skills to handle complexity, uncertainty and ambiguity. They also need to be able to evaluate information, and display clarity of thought, judgement and decisiveness under severe pressure. Today’s leaders need perseverance, endurance and tenacity to follow a course and pursue organisational goals – however tempting it may be to do something else instead. Coaching and mentoring can help leaders stay the course and do the right things at the right time – rather than get distracted and retreat into their comfort zone.

It will take a while for the concept of realistic cost reduction to filter through in the public sector.

Some years ago I moved into public sector employment – since back again. Having come from a large blue-chip who had the corporate finger firmly on the pulse of conspicuous expenditure, I was at first reassured to hear the words: “We must be careful, this is public money we are spending.”

But it soon became clear this was a mantra trotted out with very little thought as to what it really meant.  For example, first class travel was still standard at some levels – even first class season tickets for those with regular London meetings.  The list of exceptions to the cost-cutting rule was seemingly endless.

I am sure – at least I hope I can be sure – such things do not still go on.  But, as Jaluch points out in Cutting Costs and Coffee, too many people in positions of responsibility are just way off the mark when it comes to cutting costs the right way. This shouldn’t be about plundering the public sector, but neither should it be about feckless soundbites.

As well as a much better appreciation of where to spend and where to economise, we need leaders able to create rapport, show genuine empathy, elicit ideas and demonstrate credible leadership to pull it off – without ripping the heart and soul out of the organisation in the process.

And public sector HR has a huge role to play in getting it right. As Courageous HR points out in its blog HR Business Partner – fact, fiction and the new role of HR, HR needs to focus on delivering the effectiveness mandate as well as purely efficiency. Cut costs and make change, of course, but don’t cut out or incapacitate critical life-giving organs in the process.

Cost cutting must not be a fashion statement. It must be for real and for the benefit of the whole organisation. Staff must understand the reasons for economies and must be committed to making a difference. Similarly, the spend it or lose it concept of the annual budget must be ended.

It will take time and a certain amount of education to change the habits of a lifetime for many.  But this is not all about public sector, bad; private sector, good. It is about learning from one another and taking the best and modifying it to suit the environment.

For ideas on cost cutting – without slashing the headcount – see our Alternatives to Redundancy Factsheet. For tips on inspiring staff to deliver in a downturn see our Motivating Staff Factsheet.

Years ago the organisation’s flagship training programme was a week-long residential event that cost a bomb. Then the norm became one or two-day programmes on or off site – depending on the budget. And that’s pretty much where we still are.

But in a world where the pace of communication is ever increasing and information is available on demand, we need to revisit the model. Several clients are looking at more accessible on-demand training in the workplace.

On-demand training

Typically we’re talking about very short – 45 minutes to two hours – bite size training sessions or modules covering a portfolio of subjects. A well-structured bite-sized training programme is like a sushi bar where you choose one or two individual morsels from the small plates that come to your seat.  But what are the benefits?

Buy-in

Well-structured bite-sized training gives everyone in the programme the choice over which modules to attend to fit their training needs. And because they have signed up for the course they arrive more energised, focused and receptive to the learning.

Efficiency

Shorter is better when it comes to matching the average attention span. And with tightly targeted subjects, attendees get straight to the point rather than having to work through a day or two to access the bits they are interested in. As the return to work is relatively quick, people can put what they have learned into action straight away – so no lengthy action planning at the end of the training.

Targeted

With a rotating timetable of sessions, people can find training they need when they need it. Short slots can be fitted more easily into the day so no-one feels they are being held hostage for hours on end. And because attendees know when they will be back at their desks to tackle mounting workloads, they are more focused on the learning they need to perform better.

Small businesses create most jobs. The bad news is they also tend to fail – half don’t make the first year. And the reasons are well documented. But what unites the survivors? Putting our combined decades’ experience together, this is what the Calibre team came up with.

Successful SMEs aren’t afraid to recruit

Taking people on can be a gamble. But SMEs that go all the way take the risk and recruit when they need to. But neither are they afraid of opting for more flexible staffing options to keep overheads within the business’s means. Numbers are flexed up when the organisation has a flow of orders, and come down again when demand dips.

Successful SMES tackle under-performers head-on

No small business can carry underperformers, but it is surprising how many try to. It’s even more alarming how many tackle the problem too late making a hash of it. Winning businesses know when they have a performance issue on their hands, take professional advice and make tough decisions – including moving persistent poor performers out. Conversely, large organisations hang onto their poor performers. It’s not intentional, they either get lost in the business or HR won’t get tough for fear of damaging the company’s reputation or upsetting the board.

Successful SMEs keep it real

Sharp SMEs are just much better at talking. It’s partly a proximity thing, just leaning over or walking a few steps to talk to somebody face to face can get issues resolved quickly. But it’s more than that. SMEs with good communication channels stop people playing email ping-pong – for political or poor time management reasons – or devising cc lists of ever increasing lengths just to cover themselves. Such antics draw things out and issues take longer to resolve – sometimes they never are.

Successful SMEs hone in on critical skills

SMEs in it for the long term spend on skills. But they spend wisely ensuring the training they buy offers the best value for money, is clearly targeted and focuses on the area of need. Customised bite-size or modular training is increasingly popular for this reason.

Successful SMEs make more of their people’s skills

High performing SMEs have managers who are good at spotting and using their colleagues’ skills – particularly those skills they’ve paid for them to acquire. The same goes for recognising talent. And less restrictive business structures mean managers can create opportunities for bright and ambitious individuals to move up into new roles and responsibilities – ultimately driving the business forward.

According to the research by University of Nottingham’s Globalisation and Economic Policy Centre (see article www.hrmguide.co.uk), small businesses employing less than 100 workers account for 65 per cent of new British jobs in an average year.

What’s new?

A new statutory right to additional paternity leave and pay come into force on April 6, 2010 for parents of children due on or after April 3, 2011. It also covers adoptive parents notified of having been matched with a child on or after that date.

Mothers and fathers will be able to share one year’s maternity leave, as long as the mother has completed six months of the leave. Some of the leave may be paid if taken during the mother’s maternity pay period (Statutory Maternity Pay rates apply).

Leave is protected and fathers, like the mother’s existing right, have the right to return to their original jobs after the last six months’ paternity leave. Existing paternity leave and pay provisions remain in force, now called ordinary paternity leave and ordinary statutory paternity pay.

For full details of maternity, paternity and adoption leave rights and responsibilities see our Maternity, Paternity & Adoption Leave Factsheet

What you need to do about the new statutory paternity leave entitlement

When an employee applies in writing you should ask them to self-certify their entitlement to paternity leave.  HMRC has the right to check these requests. You also have the right to formally check your employee’s eligibility with their partner’ employers.

What we think about additional paternity leave

It will be interesting to see how many fathers exercise their paternity leave entitlement - and their employers’ reaction.

The current level of maternity pay (£124.88 a week from April 2010) is still very low and unlikely to be attractive to most men. Taking into account that the final 13 weeks of maternity leave remain unpaid – the last government backtracked on its intention for 12 months’ paid maternity leave – I imagine this provision will only be attractive where the woman earns substantially more than the man.

Of course, pressure from Europe to bring all EU countries into a higher or more family-friendly rate of maternity pay could change the picture. But given existing economic challenges for employers, this would seem unlikely to come about any time soon.  

On the ground, expectant fathers we have spoken to say that while they would love to take six months’ paternity leave, they cannot afford it. And mums we have spoken to are universally reluctant to give up their one year with the baby.

However, for first time mums where decisions about whose career takes priority haven’t yet been made, we could start to see a change in those established patterns. And for some women the prospect of being able to lessen the period away from work while sharing responsibility with the father this could be very enticing.

So, while it won’t be relevant to everyone by any stretch of the imagination, this change does ofer a new level of flexibility to couples making those difficult life decisions for the first time. It will be interesting to watch and see what happens.

What’s new?

The fit note replaced the sick note on April 6, 2010. The regulations allow doctors to inform the employer if the patient is fit for any work, with employer support.

The doctor might suggest changes that could make it possible for the employee to return to work. This could include a phased return, altered hours or amended duties such as lighter duties or being allowed to sit down. In the case of those who have been off work for some time, the doctor could recommend workplace adaptations.

The employer needs to consider these suggestions, but does not necessarily have to implement all of them.

What you need to do

In the majority of cases you will continue to receive a certificate saying the employee is either fit or not fit for work. However, in some circumstances where the doctor considers a return to work on a gradual or revised basis might help the employee’s recovery, they will tick the box on the form saying they consider the employee fit for some work.  In such cases the GP will already have had a conversation with the employee about what they consider would be a good way to re-introduce them into work.

You need to meet with the employee and discuss what is possible for a phased return to work or any amendments to the work to fit in with the GP’s recommendations.  Remember, the fit note was designed to try and get people back to work sooner.  You do not have to agree to major changes if they do not suit your business, but you must have a good business case for not agreeing to these changes.

Make sure your managers and supervisors are aware of their responsibilities in this area. You should also take precautions to ensure they understand that a returning employee may have some limitations on what they can do initially.

For more information see our Managing Sickness Absence Factsheet

What we think this will mean

I suspect the fit note will help employees on long-term sick into a phased return. Hopefully, it will also help the long-term sick back to work when what they need is additional support from their employer. (See Cary Cooper’s blog post Is the Fit Note Working? to share your experiences).

A lot will of course depend on the co-operation of the employee in wanting to return to work once they are beginning to make a recovery. It will also be critical how you reassure them that appropriate support will be given during this transitional period.

As for the success of the system as a whole, we will have to wait and see. Much will depend on the co-operation between all three parties: the patient, the GP and the employer.

I suspect small businesses are probably wrong to worry excessively about this – a recent survey suggested 35 per cent of small business believe the fit note will have a very negative impact on the business.

However, within a week of the fit note’s luanch, two clients had phoned to ask how the new form works. Both queries seem to indicate that in some cases GPs are unsure about the form and how it should be used. Hopefully just teething troubles.

Download our Managing Sickness Absence Factsheet to find out more.

What’s new?

From April 6, 2010, employees in organisations with 250 or more employees get the right to request time to train (extended to all employees April 2011). Employees with 26 weeks’ service will have a legal right to ask for time away from their duties to undertake training to improve their effectiveness and organisational performance.

The legislation identifies what the requests can be for – retraining not permitted. Employers are not obliged to pay for the training or employees’ wages for any time off work.

What you need to do

Consider any time to train requests and respond within a set time period following the statutory procedure – a meeting, written notification of the decision and a right of appeal.

You can decline requests based on one of nine permissible reasons. For more information go to www.direct.gov.uk or www.businesslink.gov.uk

What we think this will mean

It is sensible that this does not represent an opportunity for anyone to request training in something that will not benefit the business. For example, an employee cannot request time to train as a plumber if they are a receptionist and their new plumbing skills would not benefit the business.

It’s also good that the type of training that can be requested is flexible and that it doesn’t have to be accredited.

As Steve said last month (Right to Request Time to Train), on paper this all sounds good and we applaud anything that gets training on the agenda. But when you look at the detail, with no right to request to be paid for such time, I’m not sure it will have much impact. And I cannot see there being a big rush of requests.

There is understandably a great deal of discussion right now about the tragic death of 21-year-old Vicky Harrison who committed suicide after 200 job rejections.

It is perhaps easy to lay blame and make political points. But for me, there are two critical things to take out of this story.

Firstly, it is a sad fact that too many employers leave the rejection letter end of the recruitment process to junior staff with little or no help to ensure it is properly handled. The result is that very often an applicant will not get a rejection letter if they have been unsuccessful – even sometimes after they have attended for interview.

Or, if they do get a job rejection letter at some point in the process, it is too often inappropriate and standardised.

As a provider of small business HR services, I am of course aware how businesses can be inundated with responses to job ads at times of high unemployment. But the rejection procedure is as critical to the recruitment process as anything else and needs to be handled with care.  And it is much harder out there for the hordes of increasingly disenchanted jobseeker than for those of us lucky enough to be in work.

If you can’t get the rejection process right for the best reasons, remember the impact on your public perception right now and the challenges you may face recruiting in the future when it isn’t such a recruiters’ market. There are ways of saying ‘no’ that will build a more positive experience for the individual and the organisation.

My second thought is how little recruitment agencies and JobCentre Plus do to give applicants a realistic expectation of the sorts of vacancies they should be applying for. Too often they encourage jobseekers to overdo the ‘transferable skills’ mantra.

In these difficult times, if a firm wants specific experience it will ask for it. Applications from those who are less than suitably qualified will never succeed. 

I also suspect JobCentre Plus could do a great deal more to help the unemployed manage  disappointment. Afterall, not everyone has a supportive network of family and friends to keep up morale and motivation. Even when they do, professional and realistic advice could take some of the pain out of the process, or at least help people cope with it.

I recently had a fantastic opportunity to deliver some one-to-one management coaching with a very unsure and slightly demotivated, but ultimately competent employee.

He was well regarded within the organisation, but struggled to combine a huge workload with the need to develop a number of relationships with different people.

The result was he was causing friction, but was completely unaware of it.

No-one in the organisation wanted to have this conversation. So coaching was identified as a way to give him a chance to change and recognise what he needed to do to be more effective.

Cue a bit of psychometric testing, a couple of hours examining the results of his personality profile and a coaching conversation about how he managed at work.

The result? A motivated individual with an action plan focusing on the key relationships he has to build.  Plus there has been a complete turnaround in motivation and will.

To ensure the change continues, an internal mentor has been appointed to continue the coaching mentoring, review progress on the action plan and apply focus where needed.

The impact of these simple coaching techniques reminded me how important it is to ensure employees know what we are thinking about them. Also the need to invest quality time to properly consider an individual’s performance, strengths and weaknesses.

A similar situation with another employer could easily have led to this person’s exit. And that would have been a waste of the 13 years’ investment in training and development.

As for me, I felt privileged to have been asked to spend a day with such a motivated individual and with an organisation that does not just hire and fire at will.

For more tips on managing performance see our new Performance Management Factsheet.

Mistake one: Turning a blind eye

The most common mistake we see in performance management is organisations ignoring issues until they eventually become a much bigger problem (and one that could have been avoided). It is always wise to deal with minor performance issues on a regular and informal basis rather than let them mount up.

Mistake two: Acting in haste

On the flip side, managers can jump too quickly to the formal route without dealing with the issues effectively at the informal stage. A formal procedure should only be implemented where a performance problem escalates or persists.

Mistake three: Setting no objectives

Often the business is not clear what it wants from its approach to performance management. Staff cannot be expected to perform their best without clear objectives about what they should achieve. But objectives need to be realistic. It is difficult enough to separate an employee’s attitude from their ability to do the job and deliver on targets. This is exasperated where staff are not clear about what they are expected to achieve or how they will be measured, or where targets are unrealistic.

Mistake four: Not measuring effectively

Businesses may know what they want to achieve, but any performance management system will fail if meaningful measures have not been built into the system. For example, if a goal is to reduce recourse to the formal disciplinary process, you need before and after statistics. And measures need to be relevant to the objectives. For example, if you want to measure speed or quality outputs, this is different to staff behaviour, or the way an individual does the job, interacts with others or their absence rates.

If you could be about to make a similar mistake or you want any advice on building a robust performance management system don’t forget you can get immediate answers with our
Pay As You Go HR advice service.

Find out more about the best ways to manage performance in SMEs with our Performance Management Factsheet.

Interesting post from popular US blogger HR Ringleader last week.

Posing the question Is Your Company Brainwashing You?, Trish went on to ask why so many firms tell new recruits “this is the best place to work in our industry”?

As she points out, we can’t all be “the best” place to work.

She goes on to say what she wishes employers would tell their staff and asks what other statements employers use that are not true?  And also what companies should be telling employees and candidates – but don’t?

Well, my thinking is that while it might be disingenuous, we can’t blame organisations for wanting to motivate their staff by telling them they’re the best. Because it’s far better than employers doing nothing.

We’re always being told by the staff of clients we work with (pay as you go HR, HR consultancy and management training) that they’re not given enough praise or recognition when they do something well. Compared to that feedback void, being told you’re the best when hired sounds like a good thing to me.

Twenty-five million employees in organisations with 250 or more staff gain the right to request time off work for training from April 6, 2010. Employees of all smaller organisations get the right in April 2011.

Under the Children, Skills and Learning Bill, all employees who have worked for their employer for more that 26 weeks will be able to ask to undertake accredited courses that lead to a qualification or for unaccredited training. Once it becomes law, the Bill will empower members of staff to make formal requests in the same way they can already request flexible working.

However, and here’s the rub, employers can agree to meet the employee’s salary during training if they wish – but are not obliged to if it is ‘off the job’ training. Also, employers agreeing a request can choose to organise the training – and pay for it – but there is no obligation to do so. Similarly, employees may arrange their own training, perhaps through a local college, and request time off work, but employers do not have to pay for it.

The ‘Right to Request Time for Training’ sounds good, and we applaud anything that gets training on the agenda. But when you look at the detail, with no right to request to be paid for such time, I’m not sure it will have much impact. And I cannot see there being a big rush of requests.

What this does highlight though is that it is high time employers looked to the future and started to stretch their training budgets again.

Companies should now be looking more closely at what they need for the future. Skilling up the workforce now is crucial if businesses are going to hit the ground running for the much anticipated recovery.

However, to make the most of this opportunity employers will really need to put their hands in their pockets and I’m not sure that the Bill goes far enough to ensure this will happen.

For more see the DirectGov advice and our Analysing Training Needs Factsheet.

There has been lot written about the new fit note system – much of it speculative and much more hot wind. I personally think we will see little change accept in a small monitory of cases.

Under the new system coming into force in April 2010, GPs will not be asked to determine whether a worker is 100 per cent fit to return to work. Instead, the onus will be on employers to determine what a patient declared ‘may be fit for some work’ could or could not do at work.

But I can’t see the new system significantly changing behaviours, especially of doctors who are so crucial to the picture. GPs are reluctant to get involved in discussions about work. They make a decision that someone is unfit to work or well enough to go back to work, but they do not want to, or really cannot, get involved in the gradations of how much work an individual could or could not do.

That is not going to change. (For a different view hear Royal College of General Practitioners’ chairman’s podcast on fit notes.)

And ever fearful of litigation, few employers are likely to significantly alter their approach to long-term sickness absence as a result of the new scheme. (See Employers Risk DDA Claims Under New Fit Note Rules for more.)

For an idea of how these schemes already work in practice in the public sector – or don’t – see Signal Consulting Jane Pound’s Worried Well.

In short, I don’t believe the fit note scheme will affect more than a very small percentage of absences. It is essentially a bit of propaganda to try and massage the rates of unemployment verus long-term sickness.

Whether or not Gordon Brown threw mobile phones and trashed computer keyboards in angry explosions, bullying is in the eye of the beholder or, to be more precise, the receiver. And that is partly what makes it so pernicious for individuals, teams and whole organisations.

Bullying is regular intimidation that undermines the confidence and capabilities of the victim. It can take many forms. As well as violence and violent gestures, bullying can involve verbal abuse and allocation of blame or picking on someone unfairly. It can also include public humiliation or a subtle war of words that undermines an individual’s confidence.

In many ways bullying is similar to harassment. And the costs to employers are many and can be catastrophic. For instance, a workplace where bullying takes place may see increased sickness absence, under-performance and high staff turnover.

And in the worst case scenario, employers can face an employment tribunal with potential awards against them above £100,000.

To find out  how to spot bullying and stamp it out see our Bullying in the Workplace Factsheet.

Two stories in the papers last week illustrate just how much of a hot potato equality remains in the UK. In work and out.

Rather than focusing on the Pope’s attack on the Government for pursuing ‘unjust’ equality laws, let’s look instead at the city law firm partner who questioned the commitment of a female interviewee who had just had a child.

Observers rightly suggest it is unlikely the interviewer would have asked the same question of a male candidate who had recently become a father. Unbelievably the law partner in question is at a top 10 British firm – inexcusable and highly embarrassing for all concerned.

For me it highlights the fact that, despite equality and diversity laws, we have a long way to go before this gets into hearts and minds and becomes everyday practice.

The TV comedy The Office is memorable not least for David Brent’s cringe-worthy antics and non-pc comments. But this ‘fiction’ is probably a much closer reflection of the truth in many workplaces than we might think. In fact, there is an interesting discussion in the USA, where the US version is still being shown, about whether it should be used in HR Training (Should The Office be Used in Diversity Training).

For me, I think it’s healthy to use whatever examples you can that people can relate to. If that happens to be programmes like The Office then all the better.

We are often asked to run equality and diversity training and recently completed a couple of courses for a London client (see equality and diversity course outline). But equality and diversity training is not a one hit wonder and requires regular refreshment for the messages to get through and make a serious impact on the organisational culture. That is why we do annual refreshers. Perhaps if a certain 10 city law firm had done the same they could have avoided becoming headline news.

See a recent equality and diversity training case study.

As Kent County Council steps up its commitment to performance-related pay (PRP), I have to say such schemes are a brilliant idea. The problem is, the practice is often severely lacking. So what are the issues?

Managers’ reticence

Managers dislike having to differentiate between staff. And they positively loathe doing so among what they regard as the swathe of merely good – or even average – employees that keep the business ticking over.

Of course, it would be great to have all top performers in a business. But, life isn’t like that. And even if it were, these brilliant people would soon be chafing at the bit ready to move up, or, more to the point, on. At least they would in the boom years. In these more chastened times, your best bods will get frustrated and bored – possibly causing any range of unanticipated problems for the business.

So the reality is, in many businesses, a good proportion of the work is done by good people. And, yes, some even just average. And when it comes to assessing their contribution, the responsibility rests with line managers. And that asks a lot of the quality of their judgements.

So how long will it be before the question of favouritism and the blue-eyed boy or girl syndrome raises its head again? Not long if experience is anything to go by – because favouritism doesn’t need to be real to cause a problem, just perceived.

Setting the right goals

For PRP to work, the goals have to be long-term and strategic. The problem is, of course, it takes time to deliver on such goals and it can be hard for individuals to see how their inputs are measured. And when grey areas arise, individual payments above and beyond the norm for the group can be irrevocably damaging to morale, co-operation and team work.

Maintaining motivation

When things are going well, high performing employees can get used to their PRP until it becomes routine. So the time it does not come in can be a huge demotivating factor. Similarly, employers need to be sure they can afford to set PRP at a level that does in fact motivate staff.

Budgeting

This works both ways – it’s got to be high enough to mean something, but not so much it blows the bank. For example, the NHS drastically under estimated how many GPs would achieve performance targets and ended up blowing the budget as a result. Its estimate that three-quarters of practices might reach targets, turned out to be 90-plus per cent.

Attractor Consulting (Pay and Motivation at Kent County Council) highlights the problem of organisations tampering with managers’ performance assessments and applying forced distributions and other moderation to make pay results affordable. Such a move can undermine the value of performance appraisal and demotivate both managers and staff.

So can Kent County Council navigate these perils?

Good performance is better driven by mentoring, training and development opportunities than short-term financially rewarded targets. Second generation PRP schemes do seek to link performance appraisal with proper performance management to handle under performers while allowing the stars to shine through. And that is to be applauded. So we can have some hope that KCC will look and learn and benefit from the experience of others. But, without sounding too churlish, the record of local authorities in this respect is not good.

A press release last week suggested that ending the life of the paper HR manual would save nearly £300million and 100,000 trees. And the first thing to say is well done to the PR person with the calculator.

But is online HR the way forward for SMEs?

At a basic level, many of our clients, even small ones, have their handbooks on their intranets. And it certainly makes sense when these documents can be out of date by the time they are off the printer.

The difficulties arise making them intuitive. There are, of course, IT solutions that promise to route employee’s questions to the right answer. But that functionality comes at a price.

But where budgets do allow, an up-to-date and easy to use online HR resource that is available 24/7 is a great idea. My plea is simply that it is well written with a constant reminder that the user can contact a real human being to explain or clarify anything.

And an online manual should never replace a proper HR resource. You need someone around that knows what is bothering people in the business. They don’t need to be there all the time to answer basic questions, but they do need to be on the ground to distinguish between that and something that could escalate to a big problem for the business.

Macmillan Cancer Support and the Citizens Advice Bureau have criticised procedures that compel terminally ill cancer patients, and those undergoing chemotherapy, to attend return to work interviews.

Back to Work Interviews for Terminally Ill Employees Criticised suggests individuals are being threatened with benefit cuts if they do not attend these meetings or have medical examinations.

But, my recent experience suggests it is not just government agencies that get this wrong.

The first case involves an organisation with a very generous sick pay scheme – three months’ full pay and three months’ half pay and then an insurance-backed long-term incapacity payment scheme. The insurance scheme pays half salary on top of the state’s incapacity payments for as long as the individual lives, or until they can return to work.

Unfortunately, the insurance company’s cavalier requests for information and medical assessments suggest it is not just the Department for Work and Pensions or Job Centre Plus who can be insensitive.

Thanks in this case to a dedicated and caring HR manager acting as a go-between between the employee and the insurance company,  the worst excesses of this pressure were deflected. But, I suspect such diligence may not be evident – feasible even – in many HR departments. And the consequences may be traumatic for very vulnerable people.

Of course, such long-term insurance based schemes are expensive for companies and will come under increasing pressure where employers need to cut costs. However, employers can still do a lot to make things easier for terminally ill staff.

Another client did not have long-term sickness cover, but had a provision in their sick pay scheme to allow sickness cover to continue in the event of a life limiting illness.  Fortunately, they have only had to extend this cover on one occasion, but the goodwill throughout the organisation was momentus.

Dealing with staff with life-limiting conditions is always going to be a highly sensitive issue. Having decent policies and procedures in place in advance of such a situation arising is important. But equally important is good communication between the organisation, the individual and medical advisers.

As we head into 2010, the so called year of social media, are you ready for the HR implications?

For SMEs and large employers alike, social media sites and their use at work are rapidly becoming a nightmare.

Of course, the business benefits of social media are well known – even if they are not fully understood or explored by many smaller businesses.  But when it comes to employees using social media in office time or what they may say about your business or fellow employees, the potential for problems is immense.

From being held responsible for cyber bullying if comments are posted at work, to potential libel action, the implications are, as I say, huge. See Brodies’ solicitor Gillian Mair’s HRZone article Social Notworking – The Dark Side of Social Networking for more.

The solution is to have a robust social media policy and internet and email use policy clearly stating what is and what is not acceptable. And then to monitor them. The CIPD’s Internet and Email Policy Factsheet is a good starting point.

According to Social Media Meets the Employee Handbook, some large companies have social media policies that extend to 15 plus pages. IBM’s social computing guidelines, for example, are long, but well rated. For the SME a simple, clear and concise side of A4 might suffice, provided it covers the essentials of what is expected and what the repercussions will be if staff do not abide by the policy. The policy also needs to make it clear that it will be applied to everyone, whatever their level in the organisation.

On a related note – well, it’s still about consuming media at work – recently one of our clients had to talk to a new employee about her attitude to work. They did not like her listening to music on headphones as she entered information on their database.

Their view was mistakes could be made if her mind was not fully on the job. Her view was that it helped her to concentrate.

So who is right?

Well, that is irrelevant. What matters is the employer making it clear, from the outset, what is acceptable behaviour at work – much like the internet and email policy or the social media policy. From there, the road is a much less rocky place.

The snow may have stopped falling, but we’re still getting lots of questions about staff absence as a result of the snow.

So this is our advice.

First and foremost, employees need to know their company will treat them fairly if they have made a genuine effort to get into work. No employer would suggest anyone should put themselves in danger to get to work – or pupils to schools – when it is very dangerous.

But it is not sufficient to turn over and snuggle under the duvet when you see snow falling.  Sometimes people forget, especially in larger towns and cities, their employer will check to see who is in and where they live.

One of our charity clients in central London was surprised to find an employee from rural Kent managed to get in, whereas an employee who lived two stops away on the tube felt it was too dangerous to venture out.  Not surprisingly they made the decision not to pay the tardy individual, whereas if they had made the effort they would have been paid and sent home early in the afternoon to avoid the worst of the crush.

But employers can only do this where a staff member can legitimately be seen to be able to safely make it to work. See the TUC’s advice on withholding pay or making staff take holiday days if they are absent due to snow.

Policies about work and bad weather ought to be clear, if possible arrangements should be made for remote working. If this is not possible,  consider reducing hours. But remember to notify customers and suppliers of any changes to normal hours. I was somewhat annoyed to arrive at a main post office in Ashford last week at 3.30pm to discover it closed and no sign to advise of its closure.

Interestingly, it has tended to be those business with very generous policies in relation to absences that have had the worst absence levels. The self employed, small businesses and the retail trade have on the whole managed to continue to deliver a service.

Personnel Today’s Coping With the Cold Snap a Legal Guide for HR is good.

Apologies that we are all madly out of the office helping clients and we’ve not had the time to sit down and write you a blog entry.

Instead, why not check out a new article from the US title HR Management on the relationship between stress and productivity. OK, it might not sound like the sort of thing to get the heart racing on a cold January morning, but it is fun.

Or if you’re looking for something to help with New Year people or organisational planning, check out our training games.

The Calibre HR & Training team would like to wish all
our clients and fellow businesses in the southeast a very
Happy Christmas and New Year.

This year has been interesting and there have been plenty of challenges along the way for businesses of all shapes and sizes – as well as the people they employ.

But we have been impressed by the steps taken by our clients – and other businesses we come in contact with – to try and overcome the hurdles and build for a better 2010.

And those efforts would have come to nothing without the flexibility, commitment and down right hard work of so many employees.

So well done to you all.

As for the future? Our advice is simple. Keep looking forward, focussing on your goals and listening to your clients and hopefully 2010 will be a somewhat easier ride.

Early this year there was great concern about the possible biggest pandemic to hit these shores for decades.

Some firms went into overdrive to create detailed
contingency plans. And these plans will stand them in good stead for the future, as long as they remember where they are and have recently briefed staff on what is required of them.

Other employers, particularly our smaller clients, went out and bought anti bacterial hand washes and boxes of tissues. Largely they were simply hoping for the best.

Well, so far the pandemic has failed to materialise on the expected scale. Many organisations have pushed the risk of a swine flu pandemic onto the back burner.

But don’t be deceived. There are rustlings afoot that seem to suggest swine flu could be mutating into something more serious. We have heard mutterings from some very senior health sources that the real testing time will come when the children go back to school after the Christmas break. The bugs will have had a chance to intermingle to possibly produce a more serious form of flu.

We hope we are not scaremongering, but do dust down the contingency plans. Home working, remote working and flexible working all have a part to play in ensuring you can keep your business ticking over for a few weeks with a reduced workforce. There may also be a much reduced public transport service which could make it very difficult for those that are fit to get to work.

With good luck and possibly some good cold weather, we may just ensure the bugs are killed off and don’t get a chance to mutate. However, my Finnish friend reckons it has to be – 20 at least for that to happen.

So even though it is chilly now, it may not be sufficient to prevent either a swine flu or seasonal flu outbreak in the New Year. Businesses that come out of this the best, will be those that prepare for the worst.

As the tinsel comes out, it’s time for all those warnings about Christmas party perils to start pouring forth for those with responsibility for HR. And, according to the CIPD, punch-ups and threatening behaviour top the list of reasons for disciplinary action post festivities. So much for the season of goodwill.

But what if employers thought a bit differently about the role of the Xmas do? What more could be achieved – other than the usual hangovers – if the annual shindig was something well, a bit different?

One client has done just that. With a lukewarm response to the traditional party idea, this not-for-profit company decided to start again.

So it’s off to gay Paris for the lucky employees. But we’re not talking about a lush five-star no-expenses spared extravaganza. Instead, the organisation has got a good deal on a bulk buy of Eurostar tickets and a very enticing looking 12 euro lunch in a Parisian restaurant. All for under £60 a head! And because the trip is on a Friday, some staff are staying on and making a weekend of it (at their own expense).

This new take on the Christmas do has generated so much more than the usual unsavoury photocopies (or worse). 
Morale and motivation are up and everyone is talking about the trip and getting enthusiastic.

Well done for some creative thinking we say.

Bon voyage and bon noel.

We recently wrote an article on tackling under-performing staff for a local business title. And by sticking to 10 top tips, we made it pretty snappy.

But this week I was asked a different question – what’s the most common mistake you see in dealing with under performers.

Our job at Calibre HR & Training is to stop you getting these things wrong – and that’s what we do. But we do get calls from employers on the verge of making a mistake (sometimes multiple mistakes).

So the answer? It is number two on our top tips (see below for the full article). Organisations ignore things until they eventually become a much bigger issue (and one that could have been avoided). Or they jump too quickly to the formal route without dealing with the issues effectively at the informal stage.

For more on managing performance see our Performance Management Factsheet. If you haven’t already signed up, it only takes a few seconds and then you can download all of our HR factsheets. If you could be on the verge of mistaking a similar mistake don’t forget our Pay As You Go HR advice line.

And here’s our top ten tips

Consistent approach – adopt a uniform approach based on a published disciplinary procedure and avoid picking on specific groups for anything other than justified performance issues.

Stay on top of issues – deal with minor day-to-day performance issues informally and instigate a formal procedure only where problems escalate or persist.

Remember your goal – focus on your primary aim which should be to achieve an improvement, not dismissal.

Investigate fully – if formal action becomes necessary, investigate underlying reasons for the individual’s poor performance and give them an opportunity to explain it.

Remember the Acas Code – ensure you comply with the requirements of the new Acas Code on disciplinary procedures.

Set out improvement targets – agree the improvement needed with the employee concerned and the timescale in which this must be achieved.

Help them achieve targets – provide additional support, supervision and training as necessary; your aim is to help individuals reach the required standard of performance.

Consider all options – where the employee is unable to reach the required standard, follow your disciplinary procedure, increasing the level of sanction if they are not achieving the required levels of performance. Where they do not reach required standards, consider redeployment as an alternative to dismissal.

Give right to appeal – where you decide to dismiss, offer the employee the right to appeal.

Keep records – take notes and keep records of the process so you can demonstrate the fairness of any eventual dismissal.

Find out how Calibre HR & Training director Tara Lloyd designed a new equality and diversity workshop for a leading London-based social care provider. The workshop is now regularly delivered across the country to a range of delegates from central office teams, to care home staff and drug and alcohol outreach workers.

Read the equality and diversity workshop case study

Clients have been asking about the implications of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) decision in the Pereda case and what it means for holidays and sickness absence.

Last month, the ECJ issued a landmark decision (Pereda v Madrid Movilidad SA) ruling an employee who is sick during planned holidays has the right under the European Working Time Directive to take that leave at a later date.

The ruling effectively gives staff who fall sick during annual leave, or are sick before and during when the annual leave was planned, the right to carry holidays over. The ECJ requires employers to accommodate such requests, even where it means carrying leave over into a new holiday year.

Unfortunately for British employers, this ruling contradicts UK sickness regulations under the Working Time Directive and so creates some confusion. As a result, a change in UK sickness law may be needed to clarify the position for employers and employees.

The most common question from clients is: “What should I do if someone is sick while they are on holiday?”

While we wait for clarification on the ruling from the House of Lords, my advice is agree to reschedule annual leave if an employee says they were sick during their holiday. Ask to see evidence – a doctor’s or hospital certificate or evidence they attended one – and ask if they are happy to use their annual leave for the period in question. If they do not want to, agree to accrue the holiday entitlement – even if it is in another holiday year.

Importantly, do not tell an employee who was sick while on holiday, or who is sick leading up to a holiday, they have lost their holiday entitlement. Discuss it with them, and reschedule the holiday time.

As for employees on sick leave when their annual leave is due, do not force them to take it. Allow them to take the leave at a later date – even another holiday year.

Of course, this ruling creates many issues for employers. The sooner the House of Lords clarifies the position the better.

For more on current sickness absence legislation see our Holiday Entitlement Factsheet

Some interesting developments afoot with plans for the second six months of maternity leave to be able to be transferred to the mother’s partner. The changes will take effect from 2011.

Some employers have said they think this will be an administrative nightmare. But I disagree. In fact, I don’t see it being any more tricky to manage than current arrangements. And as it is only the second six months that can be transferred, employers will have six months to prepare for it.

On the parents’ side, I have spoken to many couples who think it is a great idea. Dads, in particular, see the prospect of ‘six months off’ as very attractive. Thought I’m not convinced ‘off’ is quite the right word.

However, as nice as the prospect of dads at home may
seem, I suspect family decisions may come down to
earning capability. Arrangements for pay will remain the same (statutory pay will only be paid for three of the second six months), so affordability will be critical to uptake of this new scheme.

In terms of whether or not shared maternity leave is beneficial for the employment market, my view is anything that gives freedom and flexibility is a good thing.

For details of current arrangements for maternity and paternity leave see our Maternity, Paternity & Adoption Leave Factsheet or for more on flexible working see our Changes to Flexible Working Factsheet

A client asked me an interesting question the other day. They had recruited a new employee through an agency and were asked by the agency for full details of the terms and conditions of employment.

Our client replied they did not give full terms and conditions immediately and only provided essential information about the main terms. The agency insisted this was illegal and full written particulars should be given before the employee started. The agency said they had never heard of an employer doing anything different.

So who was right?

Well, the client. Full written particulars do not have to be given immediately. You have up to two months after the start date to issue full written particulars.

However, this sort of delay is very unusual. Most companies issue full written particulars upon commencement to ensure new employees are aware from the start what is expected from them.

What I thought was interesting, was the agency’s insistence this was not allowed. It got me thinking: although they are recruitment specialists, agencies are not employment law specialists. It also got me wondering how many small employers know exactly what they should issue as a minimum upon commencement. And what they have to supply within two months.

So, to set the record straight, here’s our latest factsheet. Our Contracts of Employment Factsheet explains what information must be given upon joining and what may be provided up to two months after the start date. This is the technicalities covered. But to save admin time, there is no reason why everything can’t be issued together – an approach most companies take and one we’d recommend.

When employees have been off work for a number of weeks or months, it becomes increasingly difficult for them to return to work. It was this the recently closed consultation initiated by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) was designed to tackle.

The idea on the table was that instead of saying someone was totally unfit for work, it might instead be stated what they could do with adaptations to the workplace, or on the basis of part-time or shorter working days.

For me there are considerable issues here. While admirable in its intention, I’m not sure this is the right solution.

For larger organisations with occupational health services, it might be possible to have a proactive involvement regarding a phased return to work. But for the smaller business, it could be an administrative nightmare.

As well as costs associated with making changes to accommodate a partially fit employee, there is also tremendous scope for disputes about workplace adjustments. That is a lot of effort for what might only be a short-term need.

There is also concern GPs, increasingly pressurised to provide such certificates to cut the number of long-term sick, might feel patient relationships are undermined as a result of closer liaison between themselves and patients’ employers.

Similarly, patients might feel pushed into returning to work too early for their own good.

The whole history of sick notes is a contentious one. GPs used to have to issue sick notes after three days’ of absence. This was subsequently increased to seven days following pressure from the British Medical Association. Increasingly, however, GPs are saying the existing system is not fit for purpose.

Whether the fit notes scheme will help is still somewhat suspect.

With such uncertainty out there, it is quite natural people will want to stay put when they are established in their jobs. Nobody wants to risk moving and losing employment rights they have taken a few years to build up.

Among our clients this is increasingly proving to be an issue. One company recently advertised an interesting and quite well-paid job, but was surprised by the low interest.

Where they were expecting 20 or 30 good responses to a well-written ad, comprehensive briefing and job description, they only got 20 replies. Of those, only two or three met the specification. Fortunately it was possible to fill the vacancy as there was one exceptional candidate, but it would have been good to have had more choice.

So it is clear people are reluctant to move, and your own staff will be in this situation too. But don’t reply on complacency when it comes to keeping them. When the economy improves, people will start to look around again for more challenging and possibly better paid roles.

Keep on looking for ways to keep key staff motivated and interested. You may not at this stage be able to offer more money, but you can offer development opportunities, job enrichment, work experience in other parts of your business, or even short-term secondments to a client. See our Motivating Staff Factsheet for more ideas.

Training and development will also pay dividends in keeping your key people when the economy improves.  We have noticed that while in previous recessions training budgets were slashed, this time around the cut backs have not been as draconian as the ’70s and ’80s.

There is also some government money available through Train to Gain. Make sure you take advantage of such help to encourage your staff to develop within your business. See our Analysing Training Needs Factsheet for help with identifying where to spend on training for maximum impact.

Parts of the press are suggesting some people might just be taking advantage of the notoriety surrounding swine flu – and the fact people are discouraged from going to their GP – to extend their summer break or add to their holiday year using flu as an excuse.

Is it valid? Possibly.

A survey by First Care of 62,000 workers from 30 organisations found absence levels up to five days per 1,000 employees in July 2009, compared to 1.7 days in July 2008.

So we do suggest you carry out a return to work interview and keep good records of the reasons employees have been away sick. It is quite unusual to catch flu twice (except for a new strain) as you have usually built up immunity to the virus. So a gentle reminder to one and all may be beneficial (see our Managing Sickness Absence Factsheet for more).

Don’t forget also that older workers may have a greater immunity to the swine flu virus as they will have been exposed to other flu viruses in the past.

But whether it’s down to increased immunity or a greater propensity by younger people to ‘throw a sickie’, it’s interesting to note 16 to 20-year-olds took 11 days sick leave per 1,000 employees in July, compared to 2.8 days for the over 60s.

With so much in the press – too much? – I am surprised to see so many SMEs doing so little to prepare for a rapid surge in swine flu numbers. Or, to be fair, perhaps times are such most small businesses are struggling with the here and now rather than what might be around the corner in the autumn.

We have blogged about the HR implications of swine flu many times and what SMEs need to do – most comprehensively in the post Preparing for Flu – What to do Now. At the risk of repeating myself, I thought it might be worth noting what seems too often to still be missing.

Contingency plan

At its most simple, this should outline what the business will do when more employees are sick.

• A starting point is to work out the minimum number of people required to run a specific business area.
• Look at transferable skills in the business and how these could be used in a crisis.
• Would it pay off to train key workers now so they can be more flexible when and if the time comes?

Swine flu policy

This should state clearly what your policy is and what staff are required to do about specific issues relating to the swine flu outbreak, for instance:

• What is the company’s policy on staff who do not want to come to work for fear of contracting swine flu during a workplace outbreak?
• What is your policy on someone who has been exposed to the virus?
• Will such absences be paid or unpaid? Most organisations cannot afford for this to be paid time off, so it will be unpaid. This might come under your Parental Leave Policy, where the employee is the parent of young children. Or you might give it as time off to deal with domestic emergencies to which all employees are entitled.
• Might staff be asked to take such time off as holiday leave? You can only do this with their agreement.

Policy review

It is wise to ensure your existing policies are up-to-date and robust enough to cover a swine flu crisis. You might want to consider modifying a number of policies including:

• Sickness absence
• Dependant leave
• Flexible working
• Maternity leave

Informed and up-to-date

There is so much misinformation out there, employers need to take a lead on knowing the government’s latest advice. Be careful you only pass on government guidelines. Do not develop your own as you may risk possible negligence claims – as yet an untested area of law.

Tissues and antiseptic hand wipes

It’s basic, but it can stop germs spreading. Make sure you also provide proper disposal methods. Antiseptic wipes have already caused blocked drains in a number of areas.

Ensuring teams can make decisions efficiently and professionally is always a problem for businesses – whatever their size. But when economic turbulence makes the stakes so much higher, the need to make decisions well is ever more critical.

As an HR and training company, we work with a range of businesses. From SMEs with no internal professional HR resource, to employers with limited HR support (perhaps a part-time HR manager), right up to large organisations with fully functioning HR and training teams. This issue is relevant to them all.

So how can you stop teams wasting time and energy by pulling in different directions when what you need is agreement over what to do next?

Facilitation is the key. A facilitator – anyone with the right approach and skills – steps into a situation when those involved have reached a stage when they cannot by themselves overcome the problems they face. They have reached a stalemate.

For the manger or team leader in a small business, facilitation skills can help get teams working co-operatively on key decision-making issues. Using a few basic techniques (see our Facilitation Factsheet), managers can engage the whole team, collect all viewpoints, and get the team to consider its options and identify what actions need to be taken.

For the HR professional, helping teams and individuals work through challenges they may not have faced before and developing solutions is perhaps the biggest contribution they can make right now. Every organisation wants to see maximum value added by HR and this is perhaps the greatest opportunity to demonstrate that.

The Department of Health is considering extending the period
employees can ’self-certificate’ sickness absence from 
seven to fourteen days.The move is designed to take the pressure off GP surgeries as the swine flu epidemic progresses.

If approved – most likely in the autumn when the incidence of the pandemic is expected to increase – employees will need to fill in a self-certification form to cover any absence up to fourteen days (currently seven days). So until further notice, the seven days for self-certification still applies.

But there is concern the extension could provide an incentive for some people to take more time off than they need. So what can you do to stop this happening?

The main thing is to ensure staff understand your policy on sick leave reporting. As with any employment policy, the key is to make sure everyone knows what the policy is and the reason for it. Staff must also know the policy is applied fairly and consistently.

So how should your policy change to reflect self-certification?

A simple solution to deter employees from taking unnecessary or excessive leave might be a return to work interview for everyone returning from any period of absence.

The interview need not be overly formal or onerous. However, it should be done for everyone returning from sick leave, irrespective of whether or not they had swine flu. Held in private and handled in a sensitive and professional manner, the interview should:

• Welcome the employee back to work.
• Ensure they are fully fit to return to work.
• Identify the reason for the absence and confirm the length of absence.
• Identify and address any problem (work-related or otherwise) that may be causing or contributing to the absence.
• Investigate or identify any adjustments to the workplace, hours or duties that may reduce or eliminate future absences.
• Agree immediate priorities.
• Update the employee about developments.

By making this a routine event, everyone will be aware their absence has been noted. But as important, it will make it clear you care about the employee’s welfare and are glad to see they have returned to work.

If people feel valued they are more likely to return to work as they get better rather than taking the full 14 days.

See also our 10 Steps to Prepare for Swine Flu

The House of Lords has recently ruled in Stringer v HMRC that holiday pay continues to accrue even when an employee is away sick. This applies to all employees, whether on maternity, adoption, sick leave or long-term sick leave.

So even if you have an employee who has been transferred to a long-term sickness cover insurance-based scheme, when and if they do return (or retire) they should still be paid for accrued holiday in that year.

What is not clear at this stage is whether it is just for the final year of their employment.  The argument would be that they have been paid fully for the years in question which would include a number of weeks’ holiday pay.

The issue is less clear as to what length of time the payment could be backdated to – a potentially costly additional cost for hard-pressed businesses of whatever size.

See Managing Sickness Absence Factsheet and Holiday Entitlement Factsheet for more.

The maximum limit on ‘a week’s pay’ used to calculate redundancy payments is going up to £380 for redundancies on or after October 1, 2009. So if you are making redundant an employee earning over £380 a week, their weekly pay will be capped at £380 for the purposes of calculating redundancy pay. It is currently capped at £350.

To find out how to calculate redundancy payments see our Making Redundancies Factsheet.

While this increase offers extra protection to employees made redundant during the recession, it has already been announced there will be no rise in February 2010. The limit usually increases every February in line with the retail prices index. But after October 1, 2009, the next increase will not be until February 2011.

So while this increase may help those losing their jobs a little in the short run, is it realistic to imagine the ‘green shoots’ will thrive and better times return before 2011? If not, workers made redundant between October 2009 and April 2011 may well feel doubly penalised. Yes, inflation may still be negative, but getting another job may still be very hard work.

The rise from £350 to £380 was announced in the 2009 Budget in April, but there had been no official confirmation until earlier this month when the change would happen. The increased weekly pay limit will also be used to calculate compensation for unfair dismissal and other claims. This could include claims relating to an employer’s failure to consult on collective redundancies (see our Making Redundancies Factsheet for more information).

You don’t need me to tell you it can look pretty apocalyptic out there right now.

Even California’s own Terminator Governor Schwarzenegger admits: “Our wallet is empty. Our bank is closed. And our credit is dried up.” The budget deficit is $24.3 billion!

So what for us in the training market? And what about the people on the receiving end – those in need of skills to make the organisations they work for fit for the future?

With 23,000 UK workers losing their jobs every week – that’s right, I said a week – it is easy to assume we’ve seen the end to any meaningful training spend. But that’s not the case.

Of course organisations are reviewing their training spend – all businesses, everywhere, are reviewing everything they spend. But when it comes to training, there is perhaps more talk about swingeing cuts, than actual budget slashing.

So while some organisations are certainly hacking back training costs, the majority are not doing it in any draconian measure. That might sound like an obvious statement – even the worst recession does not hit all businesses equally – but the picture is surprisingly mixed.

This time round, employers seem to have got the message: training is not a discretionary purchase.

Fortunately for the long-term health of our clients, they are mostly in the second category – spending, but cautiously and intelligently. For more on this see our factsheets: Evaluating and Validating Training Factsheet and Analysing Training Needs Factsheet.

But do the stats back up our experience?

The Chartered Insurance Institute recently found 66 per cent of employers polled believe it is important to carry on investing in staff training – only one in five plans to reduce their training spend to cut costs.

Meanwhile, a CBI survey of 581 employers suggests businesses are getting the skills message. According to its findings, 57 per cent of firms are worried about having enough people to fill highly skilled jobs come the upturn.

Interestingly, only nine per cent in the CBI survey say they intend to cut training investment. Meanwhile, 51 per cent plan to target spending more effectively. Let’s look at that figure. Isn’t 51 per cent a bit low? Or are we to assume the other 49 per cent are already confident about the cost-effectiveness of their spending?

But the picture is not the same everywhere – and that would again reflect our experience. More than half of employers in the hospitality sector are planning to reduce staff training costs during the downturn, according to a recent report.

But there is still a significant 25 per cent planning to ramp up spending and 37 per cent of hospitality businesses say the recession will encourage them to seek support through Train to Gain or the apprenticeship programme.

The report goes on to say 62 per cent of businesses paying for external training plan to bring learning and development in house to cut costs. This is interesting. And certainly lots can be done with the right people and structures. See our factsheet Get More from Training and Skills in the Business for more on this.

A recent Work Foundation survey found 40 per cent of employees think they have more skills than their current job requires. So if organisations divert training spend into boosting the training, coaching and mentoring skills of staff, rather than cut it altogether, they could up ROI by tapping into latent workforce skills.

So, we’re certainly not heading out of the turmoil yet. While perhaps more employers than ever now recognise the value of training, there is still a lot of uncertainty about where and how much to spend, and when to wield the axe.

Redundancies cost financially, but also in management time, morale and productivity. Plus you end up without the teams and skills you need to compete. But while redundancies may be the only option for some, there are alternatives.

Some of the alternatives require bold steps – and lots and lots of consultation – but they are still options.

I am often asked what clients are doing to stave off redundancies – often by other firms wanting to know what works and what doesn’t. So we have put together an Alternatives to Redundancy Factsheet to outline your options and highlight the issues involved.

Unsurprisingly, the most common steps are pay freezes and recruitment cuts - they are the easiest and most immediate to implement. But tightening the reigns on recruitment doesn’t necessarily mean a ban. One small charity we work with decided to replace a number of retiring senior staff members with lower level recruits. The savings ran into six figures.

Pay cuts are increasingly on the cards, sometimes with shorter hours, but not always. AXA PPP Healthcare, down the road from us in Kent, has given staff the option, among others, of 300 job cuts or a 10 per cent pay cut.

Such a move can certainly make sense. But it can also simply delay the inevitable. Staff at a construction equipment manufacturer voted to take a £50-a-week pay cut to prevent 350 colleagues losing their jobs only to see 398 redundancies a few months later.

But alternatives to redundancy are not all about delay tactics. Far from it. Bold steps can and do make a real difference. So do not be afraid of discussing drastic contractual changes with staff. And keep on talking. If there is one sure way to lose the recession battle, it is to stop talking.

Your people are a major fighting force, keep them and keep them on side and you’ll fare much better in the long run.

Health statisticians and scientists are wrangling over the true extent of swine flu - 500 or 2000 cases? Meanwhile, the Scottish health minister says a pandemic is moving closer. So what should you be doing to prepare?

Up to 75 per cent of the workforce could be absent at the peak of a severe pandemic. So whatever you do, do not wait and see what happens.

Ah, but you have a crisis plan? Sorry, it is unlikely to be sufficient. Flu pandemic contingency plans need to take account of changed ways of working that may last for months - not just a few days.

So now the good news: the best advice is really just common sense. But it is nonetheless vital. So involve the right people – HR, health and safety and senior management – and get planning.

Ten things to do now

1.       Create contingency plans, including an emergency communication plan with key contacts and chains of communication, and put someone in charge.

2.       Tell employees the plan exists and explain what they need to do.

3.       Review sickness policies to ensure they deal with all the issues, including the potential for employees to be absent for extended periods, and the appropriate compensation in such situations (see our Managing Sickness Absence Factsheet).

4.       Establish minimal staffing levels and identify a front-line group of essential employees.

5.       Identify and keep records of skills and capabilities so employees can be redeployed.

6.       Give appropriate training to workers who may be required to carry out unfamiliar tasks.

7.       Be prepared to hire and train temporary staff to supplement departments where staff numbers have fallen below the minimum required.

8.       Introduce home working and review your communications – consider extending flexible working now so the structures are already in place.

9.       Review staff rosters to allow for adequate leave periods to maintain a sustainable response over several weeks.

10.    Encourage basic hygiene - even using a handkerchief could help prevent the spread of a potentially fatal disease.

For information for third sector organisations see Pandemic influenza: supplementary information for third sector organisations from the Cabinet Office and Department of Health

See also:

Directgov – the primary government website for essential cross-government swine flu information.

NHS Choices – the primary public-facing health information and advice service.

Swine flu information line – 0800 1 513 513 (0800 0 514 142 in Northern Ireland).

We know for many small employers any increase in wage costs will be very difficult in the current economic climate.

It was rumoured the Government would not be going ahead with an increase in the national minimum wage due this October, but it has recently announced a 7p an hour increase (or 1.2 per cent), bringing the adult rate to £5.80 an hour.

We know from discussions with clients, news of this relatively small increase was scant comfort for employers experiencing financial difficulties, putting further pressure on already hard-pressed businesses.

The British Chamber of Commerce had lobbied hard for a freeze on the current rate of £5.73 an hour until the economy improves. But it seems it has not been listened to.

The 7p rise may push some employers to the brink. It may seem a very small increase, but to many it will be the final straw in their economic survival.

The minimum wage is here to stay as the Conservative opposition has recently withdrawn a Private Members’ Bill which had been due for a third reading in the Commons. So it seems all parties are now committed to ensuring a minimum wage enshrined in law stays for the lowest paid.

But this is likely to be small comfort to the low pay groups petitioning for what they call a living wage for all workers, particularly those working in the hospitality and care sectors.

So, the pressure on both sides of the minimum wage debate continues to mount and will no doubt do so for many years to come.

The furore over MPs’ allowances for second homes and the rest has no doubt brought it home to many employers the need for clarity and consistency on the issue of expenses.

But how many small businesses will act to put in place a formal expenses policy when there is so much else to do? According to some surveys, less than 50 per cent of SMEs have a clearly defined policy on expenses.

The costs of failure

But that is a mistake. Employees need to know what they can and cannot claim for, when they must claim by, what supporting documentation they need and who signs claims off.

My experience is companies, both large and small, can get into very expensive and time-consuming grievance/disciplinary cases when there is no clear expenses policy in place. A disagreement about what can be claimed can result in a long, drawn-out dispute costing the business in both time and money.

I have seen cases where employees have made commitments using the company name resulting in bills for many thousands of pounds coming to an unsuspecting employer for improper claims for hotel, transport and meals.  The difference between a low-cost economy air ticket to Paris and business class is quite considerable.  Always be clear what class travel is permitted and monitor claims on a regular basis.

Effective monitoring

Employers need to make it clear that breaches of expenses policy can and will be treated seriously. Offences can be viewed as anything from absentmindedness to fraud. It all depends on the situation and how you word your expenses policy.

So treat this seriously and create a workable policy, apply it consistently and monitor it effectively.

Watch out for our factsheet on the subject of company expenses coming soon.

Has anybody tried ringing the swine flu hotline? We did, but all we got was crackling!

Not wishing to be alarmist, there is still a serious HR point to be made. For starters, it is worth asking your employees to tell you if they have recently been to Mexico or come into contact with anybody that has. You could then identify any potential risks.

We have experienced a range of different approaches, from nothing at all to antiseptic wipes and antibacterial handwash. This is still news with daily updates in the media, so keep an eye on what is happening and make regular assessments of how it may affect your organisation.

Minimum wage rumour

We have been hearing rumours about the minimum wage being frozen this year, but have not seen anything official as yet.  We thought there was going to be an announcement on May 1, but the Low Pay Commission seems to have delayed this until May 11. One to watch.

People we’re talking to are unclear and confused about the recently introduced discriplinary and grievance procedures.

A key change is that as of April 6, 2009,  Employment Tribunals can uplift any award by 25 per cent if the employer or employee has unreasonably failed to follow the Acas Code of Practice.

Our advice is to print off Acas’s new Code of Practice and take the time to read it thoroughly. Then check your procedures to check they are in line. But don’t just put it on a shelf after that, keep a copy to hand for reference.

Maximum working temperature?

Something else came up in conversation this week and it may be relevant as we approach what is predicted to be a hot summer (if you can believe it!). Perhaps you heard the news regarding a proposed maximum temperature for the workplace.

There is currently a minimum temperature of at least 16c or 13c if severe physical effort is involved. But there is no maximum (other than HSE guidelines).

We have heard 24c mooted as a potential level, but we think this is low. It could be problematic for some industries such as catering where hot kitchen temperatures are the norm.

If this proposal is to progress it seems to us there is still a lot of work to be done regarding exemptions or at least clarifications as to how it would apply in different sectors/industries.