Disability Online for CSR Practitioners: Keeping Global Business in Touch

[Excerpt] Corporations are under increasing pressure to become more transparent and to be seen to treat people fairly – be they employees, customers or other stakeholders. However, too often disabled people are forgotten as organisations shape their thinking on corporate social responsibility

When employer brand image aids employee satisfaction and engagement

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to test whether employee characteristics (age, gender, role and experience) influence the effects of employer brand image, for warmth and competence, on employee satisfaction and engagement. Design/methodology/approach – Members of the public were surveyed as to their satisfaction and engagement with their employer and their view of their employer brand image. Half were asked to evaluate their employer’s “warmth” and half its “competence”. The influence of employee characteristics was tested on a “base model” linking employer image to satisfaction and engagement using a mediated moderation model. Findings – The base model proved valid; satisfaction partially mediates the influence of employer brand image on engagement. Age, experience gender, and whether the role involved customer contact moderate both the influence of the employer brand image and of satisfaction on engagement. Practical implications – Engagement varies with employee characteristics, and both segmenting employees and promoting the employer brand image differentially to specific groups are ways to counter this effect. Originality/value – The contexts in which employer brand image can influence employees in general and specific groups of employees in particular are not well understood. This is the first empirical study of the influence of employer brand image on employee engagement and one of few that considers the application of employee segmentation

What are Best Practices in the Space of Employer Branding that Enable Organizations Attract and Retain the Best Talent?

A decade ago, few human resource leaders gave much consideration to the employer brand. Today, as markets become more sophisticated and the war for talent intensifies, H.R. leaders are waking up to the importance of employer brand in attracting and retaining skilled, value-adding talent. A recent Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) study on employer branding revealed that over 67% of organizations view employer branding as a strategic recruiting tool to gain a competitive advantage to attract top talent, and 49% identified the employer brand as one of the top five strategic initiatives for their firm in the next year. There are a vast array of definitions and theories surrounding employer brand. The most sensible and workable definition that we have come across goes like this: an employer brand is a set of attributes and qualities – often intangible – that make an organization distinctive, promise a particular kind of employment experience, and appeal to those people who will thrive and perform their best in its culture. We embarked on our own investigation of what forward-thinking organizations are doing to leverage their employer brand to gain an edge in today’s fiercely competitive labor market. Drawing from real-world examples, we will propose 3 key areas H.R. leaders should hone in on to successfully differentiate their employer brand to attract and retain the best talent

Is There a Correlation for Companies With a Strong Employment Brand Between Employee Engagement Levels and Bottom Line Results?

The concept of employer brand was first introduced in 1996, where the authors defined “employer brand” as “the package of functional, economic and psychological benefits provided by employment, and identified with the employing company” (Amber & Barrow, 1996). Initial application of employer brand in human resource management focused heavily on attracting and recruiting talents; However, a recent survey by People in Business Co. found that 42% of the 104 survey participants (organizations that are currently developing employer brands) focus as much internal as external (People in Business, 2010). Employer brand is recognized as a powerful tool to help employees to internalize corporate values (The Conference Board, 2001), to shape corporate culture (Backhaus & Tikoo, 2004), to engage employees, and to align talent management with business strategies (Kunerth & Mosley, 2011). SHRM’s survey in 2008 found that 61% of surveyed companies have had an employer brand, and that 25% were either developing or planning to do so within the next 12 months (SHRM, 2008)

Pension Sponsorship and Participation: Summary of Recent Trends

[Excerpt] According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey (CPS), the number of private sector workers between the ages of 25 and 64 whose employer sponsored a retirement plan fell from 53.5 million in 2007 to 52.3 million in 2008. The number of private-sector workers who participated in employer-sponsored retirement plans fell from 44.1 million in 2007 to 42.9 million in 2008. The proportion of all 25 to 64 year-old workers in the private sector, whether employed full time or part-time, who participated in employer-sponsored retirement plans decreased from 45.1% in 2007 to 43.6% in 2008. Between 2000 and 2008, the number of private-sector workers between the ages of 25 and 64 who participated in employer-sponsored retirement plans fell by 3.2 million, declining from 46.1 million to 42.9 million. The percentage of workers who participated in employer-sponsored retirement plans fell from 50.3% in 2000 to 43.6% in 2008. A CRS analysis of the CPS indicates that, among private-sector workers aged 25 to 64 who were employed year-round, full-time: • The percentage of workers whose employer sponsored a retirement plan was 59.9% in 2007 and 59.0% in 2008. • The percentage of workers who participated in employer-sponsored retirement plans was 52.0% in 2007 and 51.1% in 2008. • Only 25.8% of workers at firms with fewer than 25 employees participated in an employer-sponsored retirement plan in 2008, compared to 45.9% of workers at firms with 25 to 99 employees and 63.6% at firms with 100 or more employees. • Among those who were employed year-round, full-time, 51.2% of men and 51.0% of women participated in an employer-sponsored retirement plan in 2008. • Only 43.3% of private-sector workers aged 25 to 34 and employed year-round, full-time participated in an employer-sponsored retirement plan in 2008, compared to 50.9% of workers aged 35 to 44, 55.4% of those aged 45 to 54, and 56.6% of those aged 55 to 64. • Black, Hispanic, and other non-white workers were less likely to have participated in an employer-sponsored retirement plan than white, non-Hispanic workers. Fifty-seven percent of white workers participated in an employer-sponsored retirement plan in 2008, compared to 45.6% of black non-Hispanic workers, 30.3% of Hispanic workers, and 47.9% of other non-white workers (mainly Asian-American and Native American workers). • Only 27.7% of workers whose annual earnings were in the lowest quartile in 2008 (under $28,000) participated in a retirement plan at work, compared to 68.6$65,000). The CPS ­ a survey of households ­ shows fewer private-sector workers participating in employer-sponsored retirement plans than are reported by the National Compensation Survey (NCS), which is a survey of business establishments. According to the CPS, the proportion of private-sector workers aged 25 to 64 who participated in an employer-sponsored retirement plan of some kind fell from 45.0% in 2005 to 43.6% in 2008. In contrast, NCS data indicate that 50% of workers in the private sector participated in employer-sponsored retirement plans in 2005 and 51% of private-sector workers participated in employer-sponsored retirement plans in 2008

Revising contract sum: the employer right to set-off payment

Until today, dispute concerning payment had long plague the construction industry. Despite, on what was written on contract on agreed contract price, the employer always dissatisfied with contractor's work. This led the employer to reject payment issued by the Architect by withholding and later setting off payment in interim certificate. This kind of action had caused the contractor to bring action against the employer in reclaiming the money due to them. On the other hand, the employer will counterclaim against the contractor by putting up excusable reasons in delaying payment. Set off always misconstrued as same as counterclaim or abatement. In related cases, decisions decided by the judge put conditions in construing the terms. The research also concluded that defective works was the key factor of why the employer setting off interim payment to the contractor. In this regard, the Court will depend solely on precedent cases available and the most prominently the provision of set off available in contract. Hence, the employer right to set - off payment must be made according to contract available and not blindly done

Changing an Unfavorable Employer Reputation: The Roles of Recruitment Message-Type and Familiarity with Employer

An unfavorable employer reputation can impair an organization’s ability to recruit job seekers. The present research employed a four-week longitudinal experimental design to investigate whether recruitment messages can positively change an existing unfavorable employer reputation. Two hundred and twenty-two (222) job seekers rated their perceptions of an organization before and after being randomly assigned to receive a series of high- or low-information recruitment messages. As expected, job seekers receiving high-information messages changed their perceptions more than job seekers who were exposed to low-information messages. In addition, job seekers’ initial familiarity with the employer was negatively related to change in their perceptions of employer reputation. Finally, there was some evidence that job seekers’ familiarity with the employer influenced the impact of different recruitment messages. Implications for research and practice are discussed

How do Global Organizations Build Employee Advocates Who Champion Their Brand

[Excerpt] Increasingly job applicants are focusing more on the image of the companies that they are applying to. 54% of online job seekers read company reviews before deciding to join and 75% of job seekers consider the employer brand before deciding to apply to a job. A staggering 69% of would-be employees would not accept a job from a company with a bad employer brand even if the alternative was no job at all. Additionally, positive employer brands can have positive effects on a company\u27s bottom line. A study found that positive employer brands can lead to reductions in turnover and cost-per-hire, as well as an increase in qualified applicants and time to hire. These statistics show the strategic importance of focusing on an employer brand that delivers for potential applicants. In the following research we will determine the best strategy for building an employer brand through a company’s own employees

Employer Health Benefits 2016 Annual Survey

This annual survey of employers provides a detailed look at trends in employer-sponsored health coverage including premiums, employee contributions, cost-sharing provisions, and employer opinions. The 2016 survey included almost 1,900 interviews with non-federal public and private firms.Annual premiums for employer-sponsored family health coverage reached $18,142 this year, up 3 percent from last year, with workers on average paying$5,277 towards the cost of their coverage, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation/Health Research & Education Trust 2016 Employer Health Benefits Survey. The 2016 survey includes information on the use of incentives for employer wellness programs, plan cost-sharing as well as firm offer rate. Survey results are released here in a variety of ways, including a full report with downloadable tables on a variety of topics, summary of findings, and an article published in the journal Health Affairs