Is your Company Prepared to Prevent Workplace Sexual Harassment?

Posted on January 4, 2018 by firstcontacthr

It is difficult to open a newspaper or visit a news website without seeing another high-profile person accused of sexual harassment. Sexual harassment is not just a problem in Hollywood and District of Columbia politics—it’s an issue in a wide range of industries and workplaces. The social media movement, #metoo, illustrates how women can experience sexual harassment just about anywhere they go, from the office, to the subway, and even on airplanes. Due to the uptick in allegations, many women are courageously telling their stories—some decades old—with the hope that it encourages others to come forward. Many of the allegations have caused accused assailants to quit their jobs, leave their elected positions, and sell ownership of their companies.

The negative press associated with having a sexual harassment allegation claim within an organization can be expensive. Failure to properly deal with a sexual harassment claim and protecting employees from verbal, physical and visual harassment, will undoubtedly damage an organization’s brand. Negative attention will have a lasting effect in the eyes of potential customers, vendors and employees.

Another impact resulting in the failure to properly deal with harassment claims comes in the form of civil lawsuits brought on by the victim(s) in your organization. Costly legal fees can negatively affect a company’s bottom line, and again tarnish its reputation based on what is uncovered. What’s more? The court proceedings will be made available for public viewing at any time via the internet.

So, what can an organization do to prevent sexual harassment claims in today’s troubling climate?

First, having a zero-tolerance policy is a good start for an organization to combat harassment of any form, but the most effective way to prevent it from happening is enacting a comprehensive strategy that includes continuous training. Whether it is an in-person program, webinar format or an online video stream, yearly sexual harassment training sends a strong message to your employees that you not only take it very seriously, but that you have a plan in place should the policy be violated. Sexual harassment training clarifies—for all employees—the line between giving compliments or extending gestures, and acts or behaviors that are considered harassment. Providing training and communicating the company policy should cover potential risky behavior displayed by employees, company leaders, customers or vendors in the workplace, over the internet, and using social media on and off company premises. Most importantly, the company should have an objective process for employees to file sexual harassment claims that is taken seriously with a follow-up investigation.

When employees know the proper steps to take when improper behavior is evident, most claims of sexual harassment can be addressed internally, foregoing the need for outside intervention, including civil action. In cases when civil suits are unavoidable, then having proper documentation that a comprehensive strategy was in place, including training for all your employees can be a useful defense in mitigating the company’s legal risks.

Having a transparent, no retaliation policy goes one step further in preventing sexual harassment in the workplace. If employees are not fearful of filing legitimate claims of harassment, then the company is truly taking the necessary and legally defensible steps for preventing sexual harassment in the workplace and beyond.

For information about sexual harassment training offered by First Contact HR, please call 267-419-1390 or email us at client.services@firstcontacthr.com

Affirmative Action Plan: Is Your Organization Required to Have One?

Posted on July 1, 2016 by firstcontacthr

Recent news of the United States Supreme Court’s Affirmative Action ruling sheds light on the importance of having an Affirmative Action Plan which adheres to the legal requirements set forth over 5 decades ago. In a 5-3 decision, the Court upheld a race-based affirmative action policy of the University of Texas at Austin. Abigail Fisher, a Caucasian woman, sued the school over what she deemed to be racial discrimination after she was denied admissions to the school in 2008.

The University’s admissions protocol consists of a two-pronged approach: 75% of the student body is filled with public high school students who finish in the top 10% of their graduating class, while the remaining 25% of seats are filled based on a number of factors, one of which is race. This Top Ten Rule is known as a “holistic” approach to admissions decisions. Their policy is meant to increase black and Hispanic admissions at the University, which historically were lacking.

Based on her academics, Abigail Fisher did not qualify for admissions under the 10% rule, making it necessary for her to compete for the limited number of enrollment slots remaining. Ultimately, she was not accepted into the University.

What is the Goal of Affirmative Action?

Although Affirmative Action in the area of education, which is aimed at student enrollment, differs from employment-related Affirmative Action, aimed at hiring and employment practices, the intent of both is the same: to ensure certain protected classes receive an equal opportunity for consideration in education and employment and, in the case of employment, an equal chance to advance in the organization.

Who Needs a Written Affirmative Action Plan?

Government contractors and subcontractors with at least 50 employees, and a government contract of $50,000 or more, are required to have a written plan that is updated annually. The applicable laws cover minorities and women,[1] veterans[2] and people with disabilities.[3] Additionally, a financial institution that is a Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) must comply with Affirmative Action laws.[4]

Who Enforces Affirmative Action Regulations?

The United States Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) oversees and enforces the obligations of affirmative action and equal opportunity programs required for those organizations doing business with the federal government. The OFCCP has the power to conduct audits on organizations required to have an Affirmative Action Plan in place, obtain Conciliation Agreements from those in violation of regulatory requirements, and recommend enforcement action(s) to the Solicitor of Labor. Penalties for non-compliance may include monetary penalties, including back wages to applicants negatively impacted, and/or debarment. Companies who are debarred lose the right to hold federal government contracts in the future.

How First Contact HR Can Keep Your Organization Compliant?

Our Affirmative Action specialists can create a custom Plan for your organization that meets all the necessary legal requirements. We can update your Plan annually and accomplish all of these goals while offering a competitive price and accessibility to our Affirmative Action Team for any questions or support needs. Please contact us today to get started!

[1] Executive Order 11246 on Nondiscrimination under Federal Contracts, Subpart B, Sec. 202(1)

[2] Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974, as amended.

[3] Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended.

[4] 41 CFR 60-1.3; 41 CFR 60-250.2; 60-300.2; 60-741.2

Workplace Violence: Strategies For Surviving An Imminent Threat

Posted on June 14, 2016 by firstcontacthr

According to the Department of Homeland Security, the current best practice in the event of an active threat at work is RUN, HIDE, FIGHT. When preventative measures fail to thwart a violent situation on the job, the following guidelines could prove critical to getting yourself, and your staff, out alive.

RUN – If you can get out, get out! Assist others along the way, but do so only if it does not put you in further danger. Leave your stuff behind (unless it is immediately available) and go to your EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN’s evacuation route or designated exit. Once you are clear from danger, prevent others from walking into the danger, and then call 911. Your EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN should contain rally points (safe locations) where you and your staff can meet should an incident take place. This allows you to take an inventory of your staff and ensure everyone is accounted for.

HIDE – If you cannot run, then hide. Find a location where you’re not likely to be found and silence your phone. If you are able to call 911 during this time, do so. Even if you cannot speak to the operator, simply calling and leaving the call active will alert authorities to your approximate location. Stay calm and quiet. If you are able to lock yourself in an office or other secure area, do so. Do not open the door for anyone except the authorities. It is important to stay away from interior windows as well. During safety drills at schools, police advise students and teachers to stay out of sight of those interior windows which look into classrooms. The same holds true for workplaces. If a threat sees people through a window, he will see potential victims, and the violence may escalate. Understanding the difference between cover and concealment is also critical. Concealment means hiding and staying out of sight. Cover means placing a barricade between yourself and the danger (like bullets, for example). Situational awareness is important in understanding what objects may prove useful barriers, and what will do nothing to protect you from injury. And finally, when you are hiding, prepare for the worst – which means – be ready to fight.

FIGHT – If you are confronted with a situation where you may wind up seriously injured or killed, you should fight. The goal here is to physically harm the threat. Law enforcement recommends aiming for “soft spots”; groin, face, eyes, etc, and using improvised weapons; chairs, box cutters, letter openers, and anything else that would hurt the person or slow them down. If you are carrying a gun, exercise caution when deciding whether to use it. You don’t want the intruder to get his hands on it, you don’t want to inadvertently shoot an innocent bystander, and you don’t want the police to mistake you for a threat when they arrive. If you are able to harm and incapacitate the intruder, first ensure you’re safe, and then call 911. Speak clearly and calmly, and provide the location of the incident, and location and description of the intruder. You may also want to provide information about victims or injuries.

Two considerations in handling the aftermath of workplace violence:

When the first responders arrive, they may very well ignore the injured. Their first priority is assuring the intruder is neutralized. Rest assured, EMS and other medical care will arrive and assist those who are hurt. Try to stay out of the first responders’ way, and if they approach you for information, be prepared to help them; and
Your place of business will be considered a crime scene. Depending on the severity of the incident, this may last for a day, weeks, or even months. Keep this in mind when creating your company’s EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN. You may want to have contingencies in place for alternate work locations. Instruct your staff to never try to return to the scene to retrieve belongings without asking the authorities first. They will probably require an escort, or may be barred from entry altogether.

Remember that workplace violence can happen to any company at any time. According to a study conducted by the FBI[1], between 2000 and 2013, 40 out of 50 states experienced an active shooter incident. There were 160 active shooter incidents in this country during that same 14 year time frame. In 16 of those incidents, the violence occurred at more than one location. An average of 11.4 Active Shooter incidents occur annually (Sandy Hook Elementary is one terrifying example of this). These incidents are on the rise; the first 6.4 incidents during the FBI’s study happened in the first 7 years, while 16.4 occurred during the last 7 years.The first shot or instance of aggression is almost always directed at the perpetrator’s spouse or other family member, and 60% of violent incidents are over before the police even arrive on the scene.

While these numbers are startling and scary, there are ways to prevent, prepare, and take action if your place of business is a victim of workplace violence.

First Contact HR is a full-service background screening company that provides pre-employment background checks, employee background checks, drug screening, education and employment verifications, and many other services that may assist in keeping your workplace safe. For more information, please call our office at 267-419-1390, or visit our website at www.firstcontacthr.com.

[1]https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/office-of-partner-engagement/active-shooter-incidents/a-study-of-active-shooter-incidents-in-the-u.s.-2000-2013

Recording Clear and Legible Ink Fingerprints

Posted on January 28, 2016 by firstcontacthr

The tips of our fingers are covered with tiny, swirling ridges and valleys that make up an individual imprint. These ridges form an exclusive pattern to each individual on the planet and are even more unique than DNA. Because these impressions are so individualized, they are globally used as a form of identification.
Continue reading →

The Implications of Pennsylvania Act 153 for Higher Education Employment

Posted on January 25, 2015 by firstcontacthr

A new year means new laws and with the coming of 2015, Pennsylvania has rung in more measures to keep our children safe. Act 153 which took effect January 1st is the newest piece of legislation with the goal of protecting students at school. The law begins by extending the definition of “school” to include all public and private secondary and tertiary institutions and also extends the list of employees to be screened to include unpaid volunteers who have direct contact with children or routine interaction with children (i.e. provide the care, supervision, guidance, or control of).

Continue reading →

USDA Performs Drug Tests for Recreational and Medical Marijuana, Even in States Where It’s Legal

Posted on July 29, 2014 by firstcontacthr

Although the number of states that are legalizing marijuana is increasing, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is sticking to their “Drug-Free Workplace” Program. In a memo to over 100,000 employees, the USDA stated that while some may be permitted by state law to use marijuana for recreational purposes, it “is not authorized under Federal law nor the Department’s Drug-Free Workplace program.”

Under this program, the USDA may conduct drug tests randomly, after an accident / unsafe practice, or if they are under reasonable suspicion that a worker is using drugs. These tests check for substances identified by the Drug Enforcement Administration as Schedule I or II. Schedule II drugs, such as cocaine, Ritalin, and methadone, are categorized as substances with accepted medical use but have the potential for abuse. Conversely, Schedule I drugs have no accepted medical use and boast an even greater abuse potential than Schedule II. These drugs include marijuana, heroin, and LSD. The Drug-Free Workplace program has conducted Schedule I and II drug tests since 1988 and shows no sign of adjusting to recent marijuana legalization laws.

The USDA memo reminds workers that everyone who tests positive for marijuana, no matter the state, will be disciplined – including those who use medical marijuana. The memo references Medical Review Officer Manual, stating, “State initiatives and laws, which make available to an individual a variety of illicit drugs by a physician’s prescription or recommendation, do not make the use of these illicit drugs permissible under the Federal Drug-Free Workplace Program.” This puts those using medical marijuana under the same jurisdiction as recreational users.

While that may seem harsh, it should be noted that marijuana is still illegal under federal law. Therefore, the USDA, as a federal agency, must maintain a marijuana-free policy. Additionally, working under the influence of marijuana can potentially threaten the safety, health, and security of other USDA workers and the American public.

However, an article on the subject does note that federal policy might be in for a change. The Food and Drug Administration is performing a study on marijuana’s safety and medicinal effects. Should the Administration downgrade marijuana from its Schedule I status, the USDA’s strict stance on the drug may change

Why You Need To Background Check [Infographic]

Posted on December 17, 2012 by firstcontacthr

Your new potential hire has just left your office following a final interview. You feel great about their attitude and they appear to have the pedigree of a top candidate. They have all the signs for success: a resume full of great experience, stories about converting tough clients, and the charisma/charm and character you’ve only ever read about in hiring books.

Continue reading →

Amidst Boy Scout Child Sex Abuse Scandal, Delaware Valley PA Boy Scout Council Adheres To Rules, Background Checks

Posted on October 19, 2012 by firstcontacthr

They’re being called the “perversion files” – a record of previously confidential files listing the names of 1,200 Boy Scout of America officials and scoutmasters who are accused of abusing young boys over a period of two decades.

The files released Thursday, October 19 contain more than 15,000 pages detailing accusations of the sexual abuse against scout leaders and officials between 1965 and 1985. The list of names in the documents were deemed “ineligible volunteers” and include those who are accused of sexual abuse towards the minors they came into contact with during boy scout meetings and functions.

Police are now responding to 523 of the alleged cases. The files were kept confidential – until now – and represent all that the Boy Scouts of America could have done to protect their young members, but didn’t. Continue reading →

State Laws Restricts Employers’ Use of Social Security Numbers

Posted on October 7, 2012 by firstcontacthr

In recent years identity protection has become an increasingly big deal. Specifically, the handling of Social Security Numbers (SSNs) by companies has been reworked in a number of states in order to better safeguard their employees against identity theft. The sudden concern arose primarily due to companies putting employee’s financial information at risk for years by asking for SSNs in places they really do not need to be. Identification cards, employment applications, pay stubs, mail, or even the electronic transmission of SSNs via the internet all unnecessarily heighten the risk for identity theft. With today’s criminals consistently finding new ways to exploit inadequate security systems, it’s important that companies and employers strive to cut down on excessive exposure of sensitive information.

In most states across the U.S. it is illegal to do the following:

· Publicly display or post more than the last four digits of SSNs.
· Print SSNs on employees’ badges, parking permits or timecards.
· Require people to use their SSN to access a website unless encrypted or over a secure connection.
· Use more than the last four digits to access a website unless a password or other unique identifier is also required.
· Use more than the last four digits of an SSN as an employee number.
· Send SSNs through the mail, unless the documents are applications or other such forms; and then SSNs must not be visible through a windowed envelope.
· Keep unsecured files containing SSNs and allow non authorized personnel access to such files.

The California Office of Privacy Protection has put together a set of recommendations, click here, for any entities who wish to tighten up their SSN practices.

Massachusetts CORI Reform Law and its Implications on Employer Background Checks

Posted on July 1, 2012 by firstcontacthr

There has been a surge in legislation across the U.S. with the goal of curtailing employer use of criminal records that bar employment opportunities for ex-offenders. Take for example the new EEOC guidance on the use of arrest and conviction records and the proliferation of “ban-the-box” laws.

With the enactment of the 2010 Massachusetts Criminal Offender Records Information (CORI) Reform bill, employers face a wave of changes in their use and access to criminal records.

Continue reading →