Under the D.C. Human Rights Act (DCHRA), personal appearance is one of 20 protected traits for people that live, visit or work in D.C. Personal appearance is defined as the outward appearance of any person, irrespective of sex, with regard to bodily condition or characteristics, manner or style of dress, and manner or style of personal grooming, including, but not limited to, hair style and beards. To flesh this out, the D.C. Office of Human Rights, which administers the DCHRA, issued enforcement guidance in September 2017 to provide an explanation of this less understood protected category. It clarified that a person may not be discriminated against based on the individual’s actual or perceived “personal appearance,” which means employers may not refuse to hire someone, for example, because the individual wears a head scarf or has dreadlocks. The guidance document even provides an illustrative example of this. It states that, if Michael has a beard and applies for a job as a receptionist of a business office, where the job announcement requires applicants to have 3-5 years of experience and Michael possesses 5-6 years of experience as a front desk receptionist, the business employer cannot refuse to hire or consider Michael, a qualified applicant, because of his beard.

But, there are some limits to this rule. As the enforcement guidance makes clear, an employer can establish requirements for cleanliness, uniforms or other standards as long as the established standard is for a reasonable business purpose (e.g., for maintaining the health and safety of all individuals) and applied uniformly to everyone. This is often referred to as the “prescribed standards” exception, and is successfully argued by showing the following three elements: (1) the existence of prescribed standards; (2) uniform application of the standards to a class of employees; and (3) a reasonable business purpose for the prescribed standards. So, in our example, if Michael is hired, in most cases, the business employer may require that Michael adhere to the company’s established grooming standards along with all other employees, unless Michael has a religious reason for his beard. Unfortunately, however, the enforcement guidance, while certainly helpful, may have oversimplified this exception.

In the real-life context, employers have asked some tricky questions. What qualifies as a “reasonable business purpose”? How specific or broad should prescribed dress and grooming standards be? And what if we do not enforce the standards all the time because we have a lax enforcement policy or inadvertently miss a case or two? While advice from legal counsel can provide tailored answers to the first two questions, what is nearly certain about the last is that, if an employer does not enforce its dress and grooming standards, it is opening itself up to major legal risk. This is because, as described above, uniform application is a required element for employers to claim the “prescribed standards” exception. Furthermore, personal appearance discrimination claims are subject to the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework that we described in a prior post. That is, if a plaintiff alleges employment discrimination through the use of indirect evidence, the plaintiff must show that: (1) she is a member of a protected class; (2) she suffered an adverse employment action; and (3) the unfavorable action gave rise to an inference of discrimination. One way for a plaintiff to demonstrate that an unfavorable action gives rise to an inference of discrimination is to present evidence of disparate treatment. This is often done by showing that she was treated differently than similarly situated employees outside of her protected class. Accordingly, if an employer does not enforce its dress and grooming standards consistently, it makes plaintiff’s case stronger, which is at least one reason why strict enforcement of such standards is so crucial.

Furthermore, although only a small number of jurisdictions extend anti-discrimination protections to personal appearance, this area of law is growing and is often intrinsically connected to other protected classes. For example, the New York City Commission on Human Rights (NYCCHR) issued new guidelines in February 2019 stating that employer policies on grooming and appearance that target, limit, or otherwise restrict natural hair or hairstyles may be unlawful and could result in a penalty of up to $250,000 per violation. This is because NYCCHR determined that black hairstyles are an inherent part of black identity, and therefore, should be protected racial characteristics. The guidance notes that protections extend to the right to maintain “natural hair or hairstyles that are closely associated with their racial, ethnic or cultural identities.” While the guidelines specifically focus on black communities, the protections extend to other groups, including those who identify as Latin-x/a/o, Indo-Caribbean, Native American, Sikhs, Muslims, Jews, Nazirites, and/or Rastafarians.

So what can employers do to minimize their legal risk and ensure they do not run afoul of any anti-discrimination personal appearance laws? As noted above, advice from legal counsel will assist in determining whether an employer’s business purpose is reasonable under the law, and whether its prescribed dress and grooming standards are written in a way that best shield the employer from potential claims. This is often done through a review of the employer’s dress and grooming standards in its employee handbook. Typically, a broader set of standards with legally protected carve outs (e.g., for religious and disability accommodations, health and safety concerns, etc.) is advisable. It is also prudent to enforce the standards uniformly and consistently. Other concerns, such as keeping the standards gender-neutral, should also be considered.

Yes, indeed—the labor market is tight. And with the nationwide unemployment rate below 4 percent, 263,000 new jobs created in April 2019, and a sizzling economy, the labor market is likely to get even tighter. This is especially true for the hospitality industry, which has traditionally relied upon a steady stream of lower-skilled and younger applicants eager to enter into the job market. In fact, the National Restaurant Association predicts that jobs in the food service industry will top 15 million in 2019, and lists recruiting and retaining employees among the top challenges for operators.

Yet, just 19 percent of 15- to 17-year-olds had jobs in 2018, and 58 percent of 18- to 21-year-olds had jobs, according to a Pew Research Center study published in November 2018. This is significantly down from years past. The cause of this trend is difficult to predict. Whether parents are not pushing their kids to enter the workforce, or there are too many other extracurricular activities to occupy their time, one thing is certain: younger workers are not as eager to pick up a part-time job, even at the local eatery that is begging for help.

Legal Roadblocks Also Complicate Hiring

Federal and state laws can also deter hiring anyone who is under 18 years of age. Under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), there are regulations that preclude employees who are 16 and 17 from performing certain job duties, such as operating power-driven machines like mixers and meat processors, and delivering food via automobile. Another layer of federal regulations applies to 14 and 15-year-olds, which significantly restricts the number of hours that can be worked during a day and workweek, particularly during the school year. If you are skeptical, check out “Fact Sheet #2A: Child Labor Rules for Employing Youth in Restaurants and Quick Service Establishments Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)” on the U.S. Department of Labor’s website.

State laws also serve as a bugaboo to employing minors, and these laws can vary greatly from state to state. One example is in Louisiana, where additional rules and regulations for employing require that all minors (defined as under 18 years of age) to have a 30-minute uninterrupted work break within every five hours of employment. A failure to comply with this requirement will subject the employer to a significant fine.

Time To Get Creative

So, what can Mr. Joe at Big Eats do to increase applicant flow and hire more employees at his stores? We told Mr. Joe that one idea is to increase his starting wage and increase benefits, which he did not want to hear. The fact is, however, many competitors for this part of the workforce (such as big-box retailers) have increased their starting wages well above minimum wage in order to attract applicants.

A quick Google search offers other examples of how employers are creatively trying to solve this workforce problem. From utilizing mobile apps that allow employees to swap shifts at the last minute when conflicts arise, to allowing employees to express their opinions on branding of the products being sold, to handing out recruiting cards to customers who visit the establishment, to offering bonuses to employees who recruit other employees to join the company, to teaming up with AARP to recruit and hire older workers—it is clear that creative thinking gives employers a distinct advantage.

Need another example? Look no further than the Louisiana Restaurant Association’s Education Foundation (LRAEF), which is tackling the workforce issue head on. The LRAEF is a major supporter of the nationwide ProStart program, a two-year program for high school students teaching culinary techniques and management skills that are specifically tailored to the food service industry. Today, there are 56 Louisiana high schools and almost 2,000 Louisiana high school juniors and seniors participating in the program.

According to Wendy Waren, the Vice President of Communications for the LRA, “The LRAEF provides school support grants to purchase ingredients for labs, testing materials, and for field trips. The high school students also participate in the Raising Cane’s ProStart Invitational, held yearly at the New Orleans Convention Center, and that event provides the students with a chance to show their skills and compete for $1.2 million in scholarships. ProStart is a comprehensive program and it is a great way to get our young people interested in the food service industry. We hope they will discover that there are exciting and fulfilling career opportunities in the industry. While employing teens may present challenges, hiring ProStart students will make the challenge worth it given their advanced training.”

Conclusion

So, our advice to Mr. Joe at Big Eats? In addition to suggesting that he may want to look at raising his starting wage and offering additional benefits, he will have to get creative in his search for more applicants and good employees.

Yes, the labor market is tight. But, by partnering with a local restaurant association, using technology and social media, and just generally letting the creative juices flow, even Mr. Joe will be able to find and retain the elusive employees that he so desperately needs.

For more information, contact the authors:

Steven Cupp – Partner, Gulfport office | New Orleans office
SCupp@fisherphillips.com
(228.822.1440)

Steve Cupp is a partner in the firm’s Gulfport office. He has experience across a range of industries, including manufacturing, financial services, construction, and retail.

He has devoted his practice to representing management interests in various areas of labor and employment law, including traditional labor litigation before the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), handling Department of Labor (DOL) wage and hour audits, and litigation of Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) cases.

Steve is certified as a Senior Professional in Human Resources from the Human Resource Certification Institute and he is an active member of the Society for Human Resource Management.

Jaklyn Wrigley – Of Counsel Gulfport Office
JWrigley@fisherphillips.com
(228.822.1440).

Jaklyn Wrigley is a high-energy labor and employment law litigator who exclusively represents the interests of management. Over the years, she has achieved countless employer-friendly results, recently in the form of a full defense verdict in a complicated he-said/she-said sexual harassment lawsuit.  Jaklyn is committed to providing the highest level of service, and in this “24/7” client service business, she recognizes that near-fanatical responsiveness is often as critical as innovative and quality legal representation.  She prides herself in offering both. These efforts have been recognized, and Jaklyn has been selected for inclusion in Mississippi Super Lawyers – Rising Starsevery year since 2013.

Practicing in both Mississippi and Florida state and federal courts, as well as before administrative agencies, Jaklyn has extensive experience with the alphabet soup of federal labor and employment laws: ADA, ADEA, FLSA, FMLA, NLRA OSH Act, and Title VII; and litigation involving immigration issues, wrongful termination, and breached employment agreements.   In her practice, Jaklyn applies a laser focus on the healthcare industry, and understands the interplay between and among healthcare compliance issues, the medical staff, and employment law. She also actively represents clients in the retail, gaming and hospitality, agriculture, and auto dealer industries (among others). Jaklyn has made a point to learn the business environments in which her clients operate so that she can offer advice that is specifically tailored to their needs.

When she is not litigating on behalf of her clients, Jaklyn is working diligently to help her clients avoid legal problems. This is particularly true as it concerns sexual harassment, gender identity, sexual orientation and gender equity issues in the workplace.  From internal audits, management training and employee contracts, to handbook reviews and practical day-to-day advices, Jaklyn believes the easiest problem to solve is one that never arises in the first place.

Is an employer liable to an employee who gets injured or injures someone else while using an electric scooter for business purposes?

Aside From Angry Pedestrians, What Could Go Wrong?

According to a recent article in The Washington Post, emergency room physicians in seven cities reported an increase in severe accidents after the devices launched to broad acclaim across the country earlier this year. Denver physicians also reported to The Denver Post that they are seeing increased visits.

Confusion may be part of the problem. As The Denver Post story suggests, the laws for operating e-scooters are not well known. They also vary from location to location. In Denver, for example, e-scooters are classified as “toy vehicles” and are not allowed in bike lanes or in general traffic. In California, e-scooters may not be ridden on sidewalks and must be ridden on the street or in bike lanes.

Some critics question the safety of the devices themselves, saying some fleets are poorly maintained by “a loose-knit flock of amateur mechanics.” Compounding the problem, e-scooters are left outside in all kinds of weather and are vulnerable to abuse by the public.

Moreover, the newness of the devices means operator error is likely. Education is up to the scooter provider and varies from company to company. Some scooter companies provide basic safety information on labels on the scooters themselves. Others provide information on their apps. Review of the app and agreement to certain safety conditions may be required before operating an e-scooter.

Despite these challenges, e-scooters may be around a while. Companies like Uber and Lyft are investing significant sums in this new form of transit. Many people are excited by this option for sustainable and economical car-free commuting. Companies like Google are providing e-scooters to their employees for business use. It is inevitable that employees in cities with the devices will use them on the job.

Legal Risks

Generally, workers’ compensation insurance doesn’t cover injuries sustained by an employee while commuting to a fixed place of employment, but can cover injuries that occur while traveling on work-related business (travel in the course and scope of employment). When employees travel between offices, to and from meetings, or run errands for their employer, it doesn’t matter if they are in a car, on an e-scooter or on foot.

Employers can also be held vicariously liable for accidents and injuries their employees cause others while traveling in the scope of their job. Injured persons may have limited recourse against the e-scooter companies — user agreements limit users to binding arbitration and/or disclaim liability – which may lead some injured persons to look elsewhere for relief.

Is Scooting While Intoxicated A Thing?

As a result of the risks, some employers have already taken steps to protect employees from injuries related to the use of e-scooters, e-bikes and bike-share systems. One approach is to adopt a policy that prohibits e-scooters and bicycles (propelled or otherwise) for business use and clearly states they are barred during working hours. Those who wish to allow their use may find that their existing vehicle-use policies can be extended to the use of such devices.

Provisions to borrow from vehicle use policies may include statements that:

• Employees must know and abide by all applicable laws and regulations;
• Employees are responsible for all citations received;
• Headphones, earphones, and cell phones may not be used during operation;
• Only devices with the required, functioning safety devices (lights, reflectors) may be used on company business;
• Users must have a valid driver’s license;
• Passengers are not allowed; and
• Users are responsible for being in control of the device at all times so as not to endanger the safety of themselves or others

Employers with large campuses may want to identify where such devices may and may not be used and parked.

In instances where local government codes fail to address safety issues (e.g. helmet use, speed limits), employers may address these issues in their policies. For example, a policy might state that the speed of devices shall be limited to a prudent rate for the conditions. A policy could require that helmets—either the employees’ own or helmets provided by the company—must be worn and must meet appropriate safety standards. A general prohibition against participating in any activity that reasonably presents a risk of injury to persons or damage to property while using a device may cover stunts, intoxication and a lot of other ground.

Any policy should be sure to distinguish the proper use of medical devices and devices used by persons with disabilities.

It won’t be long before other new transportation technology is on the scene, including self-driving cars. Employers need to be aware of what technologies their employees are using for business and set reasonable terms for use.

About Fisher Phillips
Employers often must take a stand: in court, with employees and unions, or with competitors. Fisher Phillips has the experience and resolve to back up management. That’s why some of the savviest employers come to the firm to handle their toughest labor and employment cases.Whether it’s a class action involving thousands of potential class members, a jury trial with exposure in the millions, or a union organizing effort or strike that could cripple a company, employers with their choice of employment lawyers choose Fisher Phillips to handle their most difficult and dangerous cases.

(Sesame) Seeds Of Dissension: Fast-Food Employees Want To Wear Their Buttons

After the Burgerville employees refused to remove the buttons, they were sent packing for the day. In a statement responding to the incident, the company cited to its verbal, unwritten policy against “personal buttons,” and subsequently instated a written dress code, banning the politically charged buttons and reiterating its need to protect its public image.

In response to the button incident, the “Burgerville Workers Union” (BVWU)—the first federally recognized fast food union in the United States, and an active one at that—geared up for battle, indicating that it would pursue legal options. Despite the company rescinding the policy the very next day and paying backpay to those employees who were sent home, the union solicited customers to boycott the chain and encouraged its workers to go on strike, picketing three of Burgerville’s locations—which incidentally occurred on National Cheeseburger Day, September 18.

Pinning Down What “Special Circumstances” Justify A Button Ban

Burgerville’s button issue is not the first time that burger-chain employers have faced politically motivated buttons at work. In April 2015, In-N-Out employees in Austin, Texas sported “Fight for Fifteen” buttons on their uniforms, in solidarity with the push for a $15 minimum wage. There, like Burgerville, the employer asked employees to remove the buttons, as they violated In-N-Out’s policy against non-company related pins, buttons, and stickers.

In-N-Out’s button-as-political-protest issue had so much traction that, in May 2017, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) weighed in on the issue.

When the agency analyzed In-N-Out’s policy, it rejected the “special circumstances” which authorizes companies to ban union apparel and insignia in order to maintain restaurant consistent image. The NLRB was unconvinced, ruling that any uniform policy forbidding employees from wearing buttons, pins, or stickers on one’s uniform violated Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which makes it an “unlawful labor practice” to interfere with employees’ exercise of their Section 7 rights (to unionize or collectively bargain) under the NLRA.

The issue of whether an employer can regulate politically charged apparel and insignia has been festering for years, in and out of the fast-food arena, and a sampling of several recent cases reveals that the issue remains a challenge for employers to resolve:

• Pacific Bell employees were allowed to wear union insignia and buttons that read “WTF Where’s The Fairness,” “Cut the Crap! Not My Healthcare,” because the employer had not demonstrated any justifiable prohibition on the insignia, in spite of their vulgar content.
• However, employees at the W Hotel in San Diego were not allowed to wear buttons that read “Justice NOW! JUSTICIA AHORA! H.E.R.E. LOCAL 30,” as the hotel demonstrated special circumstances that the buttons would not jibe with its “trendy, chic, and alternative” hotel experience.
• Daily Grill employees could not be prohibited from wearing union buttons, as Daily Grill presented no evidence that the small buttons and pins would impede its restaurant’s “ambience” of traditional and classic style.
• Starbucks was able to limit its employees to one union button after successfully arguing that multiple buttons would be disruptive to its image.

What Can Employers Do?

In determining how you should respond should this issue arise in your workplace, the first thing to know is that, regardless of whether an employer is unionized or not, the NLRA applies to almost all private employers. And given the current divisive political climate, displays of political speech in the workplace are not uncommon and could make an appearance at your worksites. So it’s more important than ever for you to understand the rules governing these kinds of situations.

The NLRB has articulated three limited circumstances under which employers may place limits and prohibitions on the clothing choices of their employees while at work. These circumstances are:

• when its display may jeopardize employee safety or damage machinery or products;
• when its display might exacerbate employee dissension; or
• where it unreasonably interferes with a public image which the employer has established as part of its business plan, through nondiscriminatory appearance rules for its employees.

The burden is on the employer to show the special circumstances exist, and that the prohibitions are narrowly tailored to the circumstances at issue. As the aforementioned cases make clear, this is a highly fact-intensive inquiry, and employers must set forth evidence in support of its “special circumstances.”

While you can still regulate what goes on in your workplace, the policies you enforce cannot run afoul of Section 7 of the NLRA. Therefore, best practices would include having a uniformly enforced, well-documented dress code or other policy that articulates your image or particular safety concerns, if relevant. Given the presumption of at-will employment in most states, you can terminate your at-will employees for any lawful reason.

You should be mindful that, while political affiliation is not a federally protected class, states like California provide protections for employees against discrimination based on political activity and affiliation. If an employee is wearing a button, it is also critical that you avoid a harsh rebuke, whether suspending employees, sending them home, or terminating them, as such an overreaction could be evidence of illegal bias. If buttons are unavoidable, it may also be helpful to cap insignia at one pin/button a person, a la Starbucks.

Wrapping Up

While it remains to be seen what will become of the Burgerville button incident, you would be best served to approach any type of insignia with a cautious, pragmatic attitude, and to consult with your labor attorney before proceeding with a new policy or response to a button in the workplace.

For more information, contact the authors:

Setareh Ebrahimian | SEbrahimian@fisherphillips.com (703.682.7096)
Setareh Ebrahimian is an associate in the firm’s Washington D.C. office. She represents employers in a wide range of employment matters in state and federal courts. Setareh defends employers facing claims of race, gender, national origin, age, religion, pregnancy and disability discrimination, harassment and retaliation, purported violations of leave, wage and hour laws, enforcement of non-competes, as well as claims arising under local and state law. She also represents companies facing investigations by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and related local and state agencies.

In addition to litigating, Setareh advises and counsels employers on matters involving personnel policies, hiring, training, employee handbooks, discipline, termination, reasonable accommodations, protected leave, reductions in force, employee complaints and internal investigations, as well as regulatory compliance.

Danielle Krauthamer | DKrauthamer@fisherphillips.com (213.330.4472)
Danielle Krauthamer is an associate in the Los Angeles office. In her practice, Danielle advises companies of all sizes in an array of labor and employment matters, including claims of wage and hour violations, retaliation, wrongful termination, and discrimination.

Prior to joining Fisher Phillips, Danielle gained valuable experience as a judicial law clerk for the Honorable Ronald S.W. Lew at the United States District Court for the Central District of California, managing the judge’s docket in one of the busiest districts in the nation. While there, she had significant exposure to civil litigation cases across a wide range of subject matter.

This article will focus on four risks that this season may bring: how to properly compensate your workers during weather-related absences, the dangers of this year’s flu season, how to limit risks associated with cold-weather exposure, and making sure your company holiday party doesn’t lead to a lawsuit.

You Know Nothing (About) Snow: Paying Employees During Snowstorms

First and foremost, you should plan ahead and develop policies addressing inclement weather, including how employees can find out if the business is open, how their schedule may be changed, what they should do if they are unable to make it to work or continue working due to the weather, and any reporting time rules for compensation that may apply under state law. If you already have such policies on the books, now is the time to review them to make sure they are up-to-date, compliant with applicable wage and hour laws, and reflect the current company philosophy on these issues.

The Legal Standards Involved

In addition to dealing with scheduling and commuting or travel time issues, you must also ensure that employees are paid properly. Your company must comply with the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and any associated state or local wage and hour laws.

Employees are treated differently under the FLSA depending on whether they are classified as non-exempt or exempt. Non-exempt employees are those who are entitled to overtime pay. Exempt employees are those who are paid on a salaried basis and also meet specific legal requirements so as to be exempt from the overtime pay requirements. In addition, conditional exemptions from overtime may be available for eligible outside or inside salespersons provided all requirements are satisfied under local, state, and federal laws.

Pay Non-Exempt Employees For Time Spent Working

Compliance with the FLSA for non-exempt employees is fairly straightforward: you only have to pay non-exempt employees for hours they work. Absent some contractual obligation (such as an individual employment agreement or a union contract) or obligations arising under public policy (e.g., reporting time regulations), you do not have to pay non-exempt employees if they miss work, in whole or in part, due to snow or other inclement weather. Also, non-exempt employees may be required to use vacation time for an absence due to inclement weather (even for a half-day).

Of course, before implementing such a policy, you should consider how disgruntled your employees might be if they are forced to use vacation time when missing work. Your employees are more likely to favor a policy that allows them to choose whether to use a vacation day to cover their winter-related absence, or to simply not be paid if they are saving vacation for special plans.

Exempt Employees Must Often Be Paid When Operations Are Suspended

Exempt employees are different. You must pay them their full salary for any week in which they perform work. So, for example, if your company is shut down for three out of five days during the workweek, you must still pay the exempt employees their normal weekly salary. To do otherwise signifies that an employee is not exempt and might lead to costly litigation.

The FLSA does not require you to provide paid vacation or time off for any employees, exempt or non-exempt. But if you have a vacation or PTO policy that covers exempt employees, unless otherwise prohibited by local or state law, you may substitute or reduce the accrued leave for the time an employee is absent from work. Even if the substitution is for less than a full day, it will not affect the classification of the employee as exempt. Either way, if the exempt employees work for a small portion of the workweek, they must be paid for the entire week, even if your operations are closed for a portion of the week.

What If Exempt Employees Are Snowbound?

The above discussion assumes that your company is shut down due to inclement weather. What should you do when you stay open but the employee is unable to come to work? The U.S. Department of Labor says that if you are open for business and an exempt employee chooses not to (or is unable to) report to work, you may count this as time off for personal reasons.

Under the FLSA, you can take deductions from an exempt employee’s salary or leave time for absences due to personal reasons other than sick leave. The sole caveat is that you may deduct from an exempt employee taking personal leave in full-day increments only, not for half-days missed. Thus, a salaried exempt employee who misses a full day of work due to personal reasons generally may receive a deduction of the day’s salary, although some restrictions may apply (for example, if an employee works remotely by checking emails or performing work at home). Thus, if your exempt employee shows up for work at noon and works until 6 pm, you will not be able to deduct from their pay (although you may be able to reduce the vacation leave bank).

What Do We Say To The Flu? Not Today.

Although flu activity typically peaks in January, it is not uncommon for your workforce to start displaying signs of the sickness well before the holidays. The time to prepare for an outbreak is now. You can start by educating yourself about preventive steps you can take and planning for what you will do if an outbreak hits your workplace this winter.

Under the FLSA, if you have a bona fide sick leave policy (and some states or localities may require it), you can take deductions from an exempt employee’s salary if the sick leave bank is empty, but only in full-day increments only, not for half-days missed. If there is no bona fide sick pay policy, no deductions for illness may occur in any week during which a salaried exempt employee has worked.

Use Common Sense

Several common sense actions can be utilized to help keep a flu epidemic from breaking out at your company. Some of these measures are very easily implemented and cost-effective. For example, you should urge your workers to thoroughly wash their hands and to use proper cough and sneeze etiquette. Keep a supply of antibacterial or waterless soap readily available. You should provide cleaning supplies for telephones, keyboards, and desks to help limit the spread of germs.

In the coming weeks, you should introduce these measures and train your workforce to take advantage of them. And of course, encourage those workers under the weather to stay at home in order to reduce the contagion.

Take A More Proactive Approach

Depending on your business operations and the potential effect of a widespread flu outbreak among your workers, you may want to take a more aggressive approach to help limit flu cases. For example, you may want to consider suspending or changing some of your workplace policies in order to encourage workers to avoid spreading the flu. You may want to temporarily alter your paid-time-off or attendance policy to lessen the chance that sick employees will rush back to work.

Or perhaps you could permit workers to telecommute or otherwise work from home during an outbreak so that an entire department doesn’t get wiped out for days or even weeks. At the first sign of symptoms, consider sending sick workers home or providing them with protective gear, such as face masks, to help prevent the spread of germs.

Another smart idea is educating employees about the benefits of the flu vaccine. The CDC and medical professionals urge the general public to get the flu vaccine to lessen the effects of an outbreak. You should consider suggesting and even encouraging your employees to get a flu shot this season, preferably before Thanksgiving. You can even consider bringing in a qualified medical professional to administer shots at your workplace.

The Pushback To Mandatory Vaccination

Requiring employees to get mandatory flu vaccinations is a controversial issue. Many workers will refuse to comply, although in some industries such as healthcare, mandatory flu shots are common.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) have largely deferred to the CDC policies to determine the proper way to view and handle mandatory flu shots in the workplace. A risk assessment is the first step in making such a determination, and the nature of the workplace and the responsibilities of the employees will be major factors to be considered. In fact, OSHA requires you to assess each task performed by employees to determine what personal protective equipment, including hats, gloves, and other clothing, is required to perform a job safely.

Certainly some jobs and some businesses will face far more serious problems with the flu than others, and you must be prepared to take into consideration many elements when an employee objects to the vaccination. For example, is the worker objecting to the vaccine on religious grounds? Would the vaccine aggravate another health condition or set off an allergic reaction? Does the employee simply fear needles?

According to the EEOC, an employer must interact with any employee who objects to vaccines, whether based on religious or health reasons. You need to consider possible issues under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and whether reasonable accommodations are necessary.

You should consider creating forms for employees to fill out if they want to request exemptions from any required inoculations based on religious, disability, or medically-related reasons. Make sure you have a team available to review and resolve any such requests in a professional and expeditious manner.

Collective Bargaining Concerns

If your employees are represented by a union, remember that you may have a duty to bargain about flu-prevention policies. Before you make any policy changes or implement any mandatory actions, make sure that you can do so under the collective bargaining agreement.

The Winds Of Winter Are Blowing: Handling Weather Exposure Issues

With winter bearing down upon us, it is a good time to familiarize yourself with the dangers of weather-related health threats, and gain some important tips to help protect your workers from the cold weather. While the cold-weather months are obviously dangerous to employees spending long hours outside such as construction workers, other workers may be exposed as well. Remember, your employees may be conscripted to help out with shoveling out or other weather-related cleanup activities they do not normally handle.

What Does The Law Say?

Although there are no regulations specifically addressing work in cold temperatures, OSHA’s general duty clause requires you to provide a safe and healthy workplace for your employees. Besides protecting your workers from expected threats like winter-weather exposure, you also have an obligation to rid your workplace of winter-related hazards like icy walkways and parking lots to avoid a citation under the general duty clause

The Science Of Cold Weather

First, some science to help understand the dangers your workers will face. An individual gains body heat from food and activity, and loses it through convection, conduction, radiation, and sweating to maintain a constant body temperature. If the body temperature drops slightly below its normal temperature of 98.6°F, the blood vessels will constrict. This decreases blood flow to reduce heat loss from the surface of the skin. The body shivers to generate heat by increasing the body’s metabolic rate.

The environmental conditions that cause cold-related stress are low temperatures, high/cool winds, dampness, and contact with cold water. Wind chill, a combination of air temperature and speed, is a critical factor to evaluate when working outside. For example, when the actual temperature is 40°F but the wind is at 35 mph, it feels like 11°F to exposed skin. A dangerous situation of rapid heat loss may occur for someone exposed to high winds and cold temperatures even if it is not technically “freezing” outside.

The Dangers Of Cold Weather

Prolonged exposure to freezing or cold temperatures can result in serious health problems like trench foot, frostbite, hypothermia, and, in extreme cases, death.

Trench foot is caused by long, continuous exposure to a wet, cold environment, including actual immersion in water. Work involving small bodies of water or working in trenches with water pose particular threats. Symptoms include a tingling or itching sensation, burning, pain, and swelling, sometimes forming blisters in more extreme cases.

Frostbite occurs when the skin tissue actually freezes, causing ice crystals to form between cells and draw water from them. This typically occurs at temperatures below 30°F, but wind chill can cause frostbite at above-freezing temperatures. Initially, frostbite symptoms include uncomfortable sensations of coldness; a tingling, stinging, or aching feeling of the exposed area is then followed by numbness.

Hypothermia occurs when body temperatures fall to a level where normal muscular and cerebral functions are impaired. While hypothermia is generally associated with freezing temperatures, it may occur in any climate where a person’s body temperature falls below normal. The first symptoms, which begin when the individual’s temperature drops more than one degree, include shivering, an inability to perform complex motor functions, lethargy, and mild confusion.

How To Protect Employees

Obviously, employees should watch for the symptoms described above, including uncontrolled shivering, slurred speech, clumsy movements, fatigue, and confused behavior. If the employee observes the danger signs, emergency help should be called.

There are many methods to protect your employees from the cold, including protective clothing (e.g., gloves and hats), engineering controls, and common safe work practices. OSHA distributes a free “Cold Stress Card” with tips on handling cold weather. Some tips include:

• train workers about cold-induced illnesses and injuries;
• encourage workers to wear proper clothing for cold, wet, and windy conditions including layers so they can adjust to changing conditions;
• be sure that workers take frequent short breaks in warm dry shelters to allow the body to warm up;
• try to schedule work for the warmest part of the day;
• avoid exhaustion or fatigue (because energy is needed to keep muscles warm);
• use the buddy system – work in pairs so that one worker can recognize danger signs;
• drink warm, sweet beverages (sugar water, sports-type drinks) and avoid drinks with caffeine (coffee, tea, sodas, or hot chocolate) or alcohol; and
• eat warm, high-calorie foods such as hot pasta dishes.

Free copies of OSHA’s Cold Stress Card may be obtained through OSHA’s website or by calling 1-800-321-0SHA. The card is available in both English and Spanish.

Remember that workers may face increased risk because of factors including age, medications, if they are in poor physical condition, or suffer from illnesses such as diabetes, hypertension, or cardiovascular disease. Other more obvious risk factors include wearing inadequate or wet clothing, or having a cold.

Throw A Holiday Party, Not A Red Wedding

If your employees aren’t planning your company holiday party right now, they soon will be. It’s time for you to get involved to make sure things don’t go off the rails.

There is always a human resources risk involved in holding any company-sponsored function. Serving alcohol only compounds the problems. According to one study, 36% of employers reported behavioral problems at their most recent company party. These problems involved everything from excessive drinking to off-color jokes to sexual advances to fist fights (but hopefully no bloody massacres).

Since most employers still want to hold holiday parties despite the risks, you can reduce your legal liability by observing as many of the following recommendations as possible:

• If you’ve had troubles in the past or want to organize the most conservative holiday party possible, have a catered lunch at your offices without alcohol present.
• But if, like most, you serve alcohol, you should invite spouses and significant others so that there will be someone there to help keep an eye on your employees and, if necessary, get them home safely.
• Always serve food and always have plenty of non-alcoholic beverages available.
• If your party is a dinner, consider serving only wine or beer (plus non-alcoholic alternatives) with the meal, not hard liquor.
• If you do serve alcohol, don’t have an “open bar” where employees can drink as much as they want. Instead have a cash bar or use a ticket system to limit the number of drinks. Close the bar at least an hour before you plan to end the party. Switch to coffee and soft drinks from there on.
• Let your managers know that they will be considered to be “on duty” at the party. They should be instructed to keep an eye on their subordinates to ensure they do not drink too much. Instruct managers that they are not to attend any “post-party” parties.
• Consumption of alcohol lowers inhibitions, and impairs judgment. This can result in employees saying and doing things that they would not ordinarily do. Remind employees that, while you encourage everyone to have a good time, your company’s normal workplace standards of conduct will be in force at the party, and misconduct at or after the party can result in disciplinary action.
• Hire professional bartenders (don’t use supervisors!) and instruct them to report anyone who they think has had too much. Ensure that bartenders require positive identification from guests who do not appear to be substantially over 21.
• Arrange for no-cost taxi or other driving service for any employee who feels that he or she should not drive home. At management’s discretion, be prepared to provide hotel rooms for intoxicated employees.
• Finally: never, ever, hang mistletoe! Just as R plus L probably equals J, you can be sure that mistletoe + alcohol = lawsuit.

For more information, contact the authors:

Courtney Leyes | CLeyes@fisherphillips.com (901.526.0431)
Courtney Leyes is an associate in the firm’s Memphis and Gulfport offices. She represents employers throughout Mississippi and the greater Memphis-metropolitan area, with particular focus on the burgeoning industrial areas in the northern part of the state. Courtney has experience representing employers in litigation related to discrimination and harassment in the workplace, in particular, federal jury trial experience. She also has experience representing employers on wage and hour issues in both the court system and before the Department of Labor’s Wage & Hour Division (WHD). Specifically, Courtney has represented employers in several Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective actions over the past couple of years.

Richard Meneghello | RMeneghello@fisherphillips.com (503.205.8044)
Rich Meneghello is probably writing something as you’re reading this. As the firm’s Publications Partner, Rich focuses much of his time developing legal alerts, web articles, newsletter features, and blog posts for the Fisher Phillips website – in fact, he has published more than 225 such pieces in the last two years alone, and has edited hundreds of others written by the firm’s wide collection of talented writers. Rich is also an accomplished litigator. So far, the highlight of his 22-year career is winning a unanimous decision before the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Albertsons v. Kirkingburg, an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) case. He’s won cases for clients at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the Oregon Supreme Court, and the Oregon Court of Appeals; he’s also won trial victories in both state and federal courts.

John Skousen | JSkousen@fisherphillips.com (949.798.2164)
John Skousen is a partner in the firm’s Irvine office. His practice is concentrated on wage and hour law and employment litigation. John has a unique blend of managerial experience in business and personnel management prior to law school, coupled with transactional and trial experience as a lawyer.John not only represents employers in class actions and other employment litigation, he creates and presents webinars and conducts management training on a variety of topics, including management practices impacting on state and federal equal employment opportunity laws, harassment prevention, and compliance with state and federal wage & hour laws.

Travis Vance | TVance@fisherphillips.com (704.778.4164).
Travis Vance is a partner in the firm’s Charlotte office. He has tried matters across several industries and various subject matters, including employment litigation, business disputes and matters prosecuted by the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). He uses unique or outside-the-box approaches to counsel employers and owners on all aspects of employment law and the development of preventive policies and procedures to avoid employment and workplace safety-related claims. Travis handles litigation in both federal and state courts as well as claims pending with state and federal agencies including the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), MSHA, OSHA, and the U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL).

Schedule fun activities

Getting your staff regularly involved in fun activities unrelated to work will strengthen team bonds. Host a monthly team lunch or icebreaker game which requires them to work together to solve a problem. As your employees develop stronger relationships, they’ll become more motivated at work — even more so since won’t want to let the team down. You could also offer food discounts or free meals to encourage your team to eat with each other at the restaurant — keep work-talk to a minimum. Ultimately, you want to create bonds which go beyond the workplace.

Celebrate accomplishments together

Taking the time to celebrate employee accomplishments will boost their happiness, engagement, and even their length of employment. 74% of employees who hadn’t celebrated accomplishments with their co-workers said they were more likely to leave their jobs, Globoforce found. Track employee accomplishments — whether it be a receptionist with consistently excellent customer feedback or a cook who flipped the most burgers in a shift — and celebrate with the whole team. Thank your stand-out employee publicly and perhaps reward them with gift cards. This will prevent employee dissatisfaction and limit turnover rate.

Deal with negativity head on

It’s natural for hospitality employees to feel discouraged sometimes. Rather than just waiting for it to blow over, proactively work to find and implement solutions. Talk with your employees about why they’re feeling down and look for ways to you can provide better help and support. You may feel uncomfortable at first, but you’ll soon become used to managing these situations — and the honest, valuable, and actionable feedback you receive will be worth it. After all, happy employees are 12% more productive, which means more revenue for your business.

Ultimately, hospitality is a high-pressured and fast-paced industry which can often leave staff feeling overwhelmed and demoralized. You should continuously work to boost team morale, so your employees keep coming to work each day with renewed enthusiasm. Not only will you cultivate a happy workplace, but you’ll also reap the benefits financially, too.

In Rodriguez v. Taco Bell Corp., the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit considered whether a restaurant violated California law by requiring employees purchasing meals from the restaurant at a discount to eat their meals on the premises.

In Rodriguez, a restaurant employee filed a class action lawsuit against Taco Bell claiming she was entitled to be paid a premium rate for the time she spent on the employer’s premises eating the discounted meal during her meal breaks. She argued that because the employer required the discounted meal to be eaten in the restaurant, that the employee was under sufficient employer control to render the time compensable.

At the time, the restaurant offered thirty-minute meal breaks that were fully compliant with California requirements, but with an offer that employees could purchase a meal from the restaurant at a discount. The catch? Employees were not required to purchase the discounted meal, but if they chose to they could only get the discount if they ate the meal in the restaurant. The policy was intended to prevent theft.

The court, applying the meal period standard set out by the California Supreme Court in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court, reasoned there was no violation of California law because the employer relieved employees of all duties during meal breaks and exercised no control over their activities. Employees were free to use the thirty minutes as they wanted, and the employer did not interfere with the employees’ use of the break time. Employees were not required to purchase any restaurant products.

The court in Rodriguez distinguished cases where employers exercised control over employees even though they were not performing work by, for example, requiring employees travel to work on employer provided transportation. Where employees were compelled to participate, compensation was required. On the other hand, where employers offered a benefit or service that employees could choose, compensation was not required. The court further distinguished cases where employers exercised control over employees during their breaks by, for example, subjecting them to “on-call” restrictions. In such cases employees were subject to performing duties for their employer during breaks and thus entitled to compensation for such time.

The court also rejected an additional claim by plaintiff that the discounted value of the meal should be added to her regular rate of pay for overtime purposes. Since the court held plaintiff was not entitled to be paid for her time eating the discounted meals, it likewise held she was not entitled to overtime pay for it either.

Background on Meal Periods

In general, non-exempt employees who work more than five hours in a day are entitled to an unpaid meal period of not less than 30 minutes. The meal period must begin no later than the fifth hour of work. Yet, if the total work period per day of the employee is no more than six hours, the meal period may be waived by mutual consent of both the employer and employee.

A second meal period of not less than 30 minutes is required if non-exempt employees work more than ten hours in a day. The meal period must begin no later than the end of the tenth hour of work. If the total hours worked is no more than 12 hours, the second meal period may be waived by mutual consent of the employer and employee only if the first meal period was not waived.

Wage Order 5, which governs meal periods, rest periods and overtime in the restaurant industry, requires employees be relieved of “all duty” during the meal period. The failure to provide a required meal period can be a costly mistake for employers. Employees are entitled to premium wages of one additional hour of pay at the employee’s regular rate of pay for each workday that the meal period is not provided.

Prior to the decision in Brinker, there was uncertainty over what it meant for an employer to provide a meal period. Brinker clarified that an employer is obligated to relieve the employee of all duty for the designated period. Although employers are not required to police employees to ensure no work is performed, employers must relinquish control over employee’s activities, must permit them a reasonable opportunity to take an uninterrupted 30-minute break, and must not impede or discourage them from doing so. In discussing the history of meal periods, the Brinker Court agreed with the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement’s historic interpretation of the wage order that generally employees must be free to leave the premises during their meal period.

Takeaways for Businesses

Rodriguez sanctions a common practice in the restaurant and food service industries to offer employees free or discounted meals eaten on the premises. It remains true that employees not falling within this exception must be permitted to leave the work place for a proper off-duty meal period. The key will be, as it was in Rodriguez, that the employee voluntarily chooses to purchase a discounted meal and the employer does not interfere with the employee’s activities while on break.

This case is a good reminder for businesses to ensure their meal period policy is up to date and that managers are adequately trained to ensure compliance. Care should be taken so that employees are not discouraged from taking their uninterrupted, duty-free meal periods.

Hazardous Occupations – Sorry, No Can Do.

Federal law strictly prohibits the employment of minors in non-agricultural work falling within any of the USDOL’s list of hazardous occupations. These occupations include, but are not limited to, manufacturing or storing explosives, driving a motor vehicle, work as an outside helper on motor vehicles, coal mining, firefighting, power-driven tools, exposure to radioactive substances, and many more. According to recent reports, the USDOL might relax these restrictions; however, creating and implementing these changes will take time. For at least this year, employers should assume the status quo.

Restrictions Based on Age – Uh, Let Me Get My Matrix.

The good news is that, while the hazardous occupations can be tedious to evaluate sometimes, these are the only federal child labor restrictions that apply to 16- and 17- year olds. At the other end of the spectrum, the analysis can be simpler because anyone under age 14 can do little more than babysit on a casual basis. The options expand for minors 14- or 15- years old though.

Children that are 14- and 15-years of age generally can perform tasks such as office and clerical work, intellectual or artistically-creative work, cashiering, and stocking shelves. They also can perform limited food service work, maintenance work (buildings or grounds), and, in some instances, lifeguarding, running errands, and washing vehicles, among other things. Even so, for this group employers must be mindful not just of the type of work, but of the hours.

For example, federal law only allows the employment of 14- and 15- year olds in non-agricultural work pursuant to specific total-hour and time-of-day restrictions. These can be difficult to apply given that school sessions vary widely, including that some cross into the summer months or go “year round”. At bottom, the main factor when it comes to scheduling work will be whether the particular day is a school day. For big picture purposes (such as hiring), however, it is often best to begin with whether the local public school will be out of session for the relevant workweeks.

Best Practices

Beefing up your staff for the summer season is a welcomed relief for many employers. Additionally, summer jobs expose youth to tangible skills that foster independence and the ability to gain valuable work experience. Nevertheless, before hiring minors, consider all that you’ve read. The FLSA’s child labor restrictions are heavily enforced and management bears the burden of abiding by these rules. So, before diving into the deep end of summer recruitment, employers should consider the following tips:

Get and preserve a USDOL-sanctioned age certificate. If you hire an individual who turns out to be younger than you thought, the USDOL will not be influenced by the fact that the worker “looked” older or that you were misled about the worker’s age. To avoid misjudging a minor’s age and violating the child-labor regulations, obtain a qualifying age certificate even if not required (state law).

Clearly outline the job duties associated with vacant summer-job occupations. Do not rely on a job title when determining if an occupation includes prohibited work. Dig deeper and consider the actual job duties. Many times employers mistakenly assume a role is permitted based on its title when, in actuality, the activities carried out in this position are prohibited. Carefully review both the permitted and prohibited work, especially before hiring an individual under 16 years of age.

Inform employees of the specific tasks each minor-worker should not perform. Train management on what tasks can and cannot be assigned to minor-workers. Memorialize this training by distributing a memorandum clearly indicating the child labor limitations for each minor-employee. Consider also informing other employees who will interact with the minor, and perhaps even the minor.

Ensure each youth-employee is properly supervised. Be attentive when employing minors. One suggestion is to implement a mentor/mentee system where a seasoned worker is assigned a minor-employee to supervise. This can assist management with alleviating the task of micro-managing your summer staff.

The Bottom Line

This is only a general summary of the FLSA’s child labor restrictions and, because of more restrictive state laws, federal law might only be the tip of the iceberg. At a minimum, an employer should review its hiring and employment practices with respect to minors, and implement a process to ensure compliance with the FLSA and any other applicable state laws. Should you have additional questions, contact your Fisher Phillips attorney.

Given that hospitality employs one in 11 people in the United States, the topic of employee engagement is certainly relevant to the industry.

Travel choices, whether business or leisure, are often discretionary and subjective. If the realized experience does not match or beat expectations, the customer may choose differently in the future. Efforts of employees affect every stage of the customer experience: researching choices, booking options, the trip and returning home. When employees are engaged and aligned with their employers’ brand and service orientation, everyone wins.

Employee engagement is not a fad. Companies in all industries need smart people strategies to perform optimally.   As the industry performs at record levels, customer experience can stand out through one of your best differentiators: your people. Hotels are full of people, including new travelers forming first impressions and local patrons who can become regulars. An employee’s kind conversation with a guest’s child, repairing a leaky faucet with a smile and declining a tip, surprising a guest with a milestone celebration treat, flexing the early check-out fee for a guest’s personal circumstance, genuinely welcoming local customers, etc., separates one hotel from another. But employees cannot deliver such warmth if they do not have the working climate, resources and support to do so.

According to Harvard’s service-profit chain, employees appreciate the same things customers appreciate. Take good care of employees and they, in turn, will take good care of guests. Employees treated with respect will treat customers with respect. Trust your employees to do their part (including leadership) and grow personally and professionally as we work.

On the corporate level
As with any business strategy, employee engagement must start at the top.

Trust in leaders varies for good reasons. While words matter, we watch for authenticity in actions. If a leader professes the customer is king but does not empower the employee to handle even simple customer requests, the employee is conflicted when trying to serve.

Corporate values are more important to employees and customers than they have ever been. People can recite what some companies stand for and will pay a premium if the issue matters personally. For example, many travelers will not stay (and employees will not work) in hotels that have not signed “the code” because they feel strongly about the prevention of child trafficking. People enjoy participating in positive social impact.

Some company experiments to improve engagement are ill-founded. One organization is moving its headquarters less than 15 miles to better attract and retain talent. Several companies have high involuntary turnover despite having rich incentive programs. Employees might stay to attain a tangible incentive but then quickly exit because they do not feel aligned and connected. A more effective and efficient “employer of choice” strategy would include enabling community and collaboration in the workplace. The greatest mistake is simply not being intentional about culture.

And while some believe millennials have caused today’s concern over engagement, I do not see vast differences between generations among employees or customers. Our collective experience bar rises continuously. We share our experiences as employees (e.g. Glassdoor) and as customers (e.g. TripAdvisor, Facebook, Instagram). Great companies do not waste much time on generational differences but rather facilitate employee communities and activities around personal and professional interests while reinforcing alignment.

Facing the challenges 
Hospitality faces ongoing workforce challenges, including unions, dual employment, flextime, health care, cultural differences and more. Challenges have costs, so knowing what matters to your workforce helps sort out where to invest.

For example, I know a hospitality contact center focused on customer experience and on reducing agent stress. Employees are recognized for customer satisfaction as well as bottom-line metrics (conversions, credit card transfers, loyalty program enrollments, etc.). Companies pay employees competitively, provide an amenity-laden workplace and offer free hotel stay perks, which are fairly standard industry offerings. However, they also watched the agent role expand with every new corporate imperative, promotion, acquisition, brand extension and booking channel. Leadership pulled together agents who helped co-create a unified agent desktop to make agent roles more intuitive and customer-centric. It will reduce average call time and will improve agent confidence and well-being. Invest in what matters, confident that taking care of employees pays dividends.

Minimum wages are increasing for the least skilled and largest portion of our workforce, making profitable growth an ongoing conundrum. We know we need to improve and keep up rates, but we cannot justify higher rates without a corresponding experience customers rave about. We must grow employee skills in serving customers. Additionally, we can educate employees on personal implications of regulations and legislation. Employees trust employers who educate them in meaningful ways.

Leaders want to understand their workforce environment. Most gauge satisfaction through annual surveys that provide a snapshot but offer little guidance on what to do to improve. There is value in augmenting annual surveys with periodic “pulse checks.”

Employee engagement matters in hospitality, possibly more than any other industry. The customer experience is truly a product of the employee experience. Treat it as such and all will win.

Michele Sarkisian is an expert in growth strategy and execution focused on aligning Purpose, People and Profit (P3). She has 30 years of experience helping senior executives design and execute growth strategies to capture market share, improve customer experience and loyalty and engage employees. Clients include global hospitality brands, CPG companies, telecommunications, business services, retailers, leading financial services organizations and more. Michele serves on for profit, start-up and philanthropic boards/advisory boards. She is active in the Prevention of Human Trafficking, focused on assisting the hospitality industry in making a difference.

The opinions expressed in this column do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Hotel News Now or its parent company, STR and its affiliated companies. Columnists published on this site are given the freedom to express views that may be controversial, but our goal is to provoke thought and constructive discussion within our reader community. Please feel free to comment or contact an editor with any questions or concerns.

View the original article here.

Your employees are the eyes and ears of your establishment and can play an important role in detecting early signs of pest activity. Everyone from your servers and chefs to your hostesses can play a role in keeping an eye out for signs of pests. But they won’t know how to help without a basic understanding of your pest control program and the role they play in it.

Here are several steps to help get your entire team involved in your pest control program.

Host a training session

Work with your pest management provider to conduct an on-site training session. Many pest control providers offer complimentary training sessions and may even have tip sheets and checklists to share with your team. Teach your employees about pest identification and behavior, conditions that attract pests and best practices for prevention and ongoing maintenance.

Develop a pest sighting protocol

Establish a pest sighting protocol that outlines what steps to take if they detect a pest problem and the key personnel they should notify. Consider including the following steps in your pest sighting protocol:

• Catch any pest seen around the facility so your pest management professional can identify the type of pest.
• Document when and where the pest was seen.
• Help the pest management professional determine how the pest gained access.

Consider offering an incentive to employees who find and/or report pests. It may inspire them to play a more active role.

Assign roles

Make sure your employees have a clear understanding of the role they play in your pest control program. Consider assigning each employee a specific pest management role based on their existing daily responsibilities. Assigning roles will not only help avoid confusion, but encourage involvement as well.

In addition to assigning roles, remind employees that they are responsible for cleaning up after themselves. Poorly maintained employee lockers or break rooms can also cause pest issues.

Communicate

When you keep an open line of communication, it’s easier for everyone to be on the same page. Keep employees in the loop about proactive pest management initiatives and upcoming pesticide applications. Effective communication builds trust; understanding and can help keep your pest management decisions proactive, rather than reactive.

Employee participation is an important component of any successful pest control program. Equip your team with the knowledge they need, empower them to make an impact and continue to reinforce that pest control is a priority.

View the original article here.