August 11, 2010 Printer Friendly Version Advertise Join ASHHRA
           
   
PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE

Dear ASHHRA Members,

In late July, I had the opportunity to attend the AHA Leadership Summit in San Diego on behalf of ASHHRA. During the summit, two events made a big impact on me. The first was the ASHHRA Thought Leader Forum which this year was co-hosted with the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management (ASHRM), one of our sister AHA Personal Membership Groups (PMGs). The topic of this year's thought leader forum was Workplace Intimidation—and what health care human resources and risk management department could and should be doing about it. 

The second was a luncheon sponsored by Liz Summy, the VP of PMGs for the AHA. The luncheon featured many of the various PMG executive directors plus board members from a variety of the AHA PMGs: American Society for Healthcare Engineering (ASHE), American Society for Healthcare Environmental Services (ASHES), Association for Healthcare Volunteer Resource Professionals (AHVRP), and Society for Healthcare Strategy & Market Development (SHSMD). It was an excellent opportunity for the executive committee of ASHHRA to 'meet and greet' our counterparts at the other PMGs.

Why did these events make such an impact on me? It hammered home the reality that health care is truly unique regardless of the professions we gravitate toward. Take engineering—retail engineering departments obviously are concerned about the safety and welfare of department store shoppers—but health care engineering departments have to consider how to keep oxygen flowing for surgeries in the event of power failures. 

Human resource management is like that, too. When I worked in HR for Macy's, we had a mission to find the very best people who could provide excellent customer service...a tall order indeed. But in health care, we need people who can provide care and compassion to a mother giving birth as well as an elderly person who is dying, an extraordinary mission for an HR professional.

Health care is different. And health care HR is different. And of all the HR groups out there, ASHHRA is the largest and most capable organization that can provide you with the knowledge and community that you, the health care HR professional, need.

Jeff Payne, SPHR
Vice President, Human Resources
Lakeland Regional Medical Center
1324 Lakeland Hills Boulevard
Lakeland, FL 33805-4500
P: 863-687-1045
F: 863-284-1971

 
Bernard Hodes Group
Headlines
ASHHRA NEWS
LEGAL
WORKFORCE
COMPENSATION
GENERAL HR
BENEFITS
PHYSICIANS
MANAGEMENT & LEADERSHIP
PI Worldwide
LEGAL

Is labor still a formidable threat or have their recent efforts failed to secure their relevance for the future?
When labor unions, particularly the Service Employee International Union (SEIU), spent hundreds of millions during the last presidential election cycle—resulting in a labor-friendly democratic administration and congressional majority for the first time in a decade—it appeared the labor movement was poised to make a swift resurgence. The situation was almost perfect—an administration philosophically pro-union, a democratic-controlled Congress, and some very serious political IOUs. Given the environment, unions like SEIU took advantage of the new political landscape, having its former president, Andrew Stern, earn the designation as the most frequent visitor to the White House during the new administration’s first year. Despite the millions of dollars spent and a politically favorable environment, Big Labor failed to achieve significant inroads in turning around a declining membership trend and has yet to achieve its primary legislative agenda item, The Employee Free Choice Act.

What continues to hold labor back?
At the root of Big Labor’s dilemma lies the reality of politics (even in a democratic administration and democratic control of both the House and the Senate). And at the center of Big Labor’s recent challenges over the past year we find the battle for health reform, which aside from the nation’s economic crisis and dual wars overseas, consumed almost the entire political maneuvering, favors and trade offs for the first eighteen months of President Obama’s administration, leaving little political energy left over for labor law reform. Although the leaders of various unions voiced solidarity and pledged to work together towards common goals, the internal workings of the union movement continues to be inherently politically charged, power- based and, in many respects, petty.

Even Andrew Stern, the poster child for the new labor movement, recently ‘resigned’ after his internal power grab and politically based focus was discredited to the point that his handpicked successor was not selected to take over.

While SEIU and other unions were dealing with internal changes, the administration began to realize that even though the unions had been flush with cash and furnished volunteers essential for effective political campaigning, the deep pockets were not endless and the impatience was growing due to lack of legislative action. Further, polling revealed the majority of Americans are not supportive of granting unions "card check" recognition or giving them more power or influence outside of traditional NLRA channels. These realities leave the political environment with an interesting dilemma—how to retain the monetary campaign support and on-the-ground grassroots organizing support without publically supporting and endorsing efforts to increase union power (i.e., increased union membership).

So how is the administration dealing with this newly realized dilemma?
The administration has changed tactics to respond to the roadblocks created by this political dilemma; it has shown the initial signs of using the regulatory power of various federal agencies to fundamentally change the rules without the need for congressional approval and public scrutiny. The fundamental goal continues to be to make it easier for unions to win elections by limiting the amount of counter-union information an employee is exposed to before voting or signing a card. The unions, not necessarily picky about how this fundamental goal is achieved, recognize that if employees are exposed only to the union rhetoric, the ‘sell’ of the union will be much easier, thereby accomplishing their number-one goal of increased revenue through increased membership and resulting dues.

With the appointment of vocal union advocate and attorney, Wilma Liebmann, as chair of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), and the recent recess appointments of two additional strongly pro-union members, Craig Becker (Associate General Counsel for both SEIU and the AFL-CIO) and Mark Pearce (career union attorney and board of director for the AFL-CIO’s Lawyers Coordinating Committee), to fill two of the NLRB’s three open seats (and leaving the third slot, traditionally reserved for the minority party, vacant), the administration has created the most labor-friendly NLRB majority in decades. This new reality creates the very real opportunity for a rash of potentially swift and far reaching changes while circumventing the legislative process and the distractions and potential political barriers that come with it. At the top of the list of likely changes to current NLRB guidelines is a significant reduction of the election campaign period from the generally followed 42-day guideline to as few as five days or a couple of weeks on the high end. This change would serve to substantially curtail an employer’s ability to even provide information on the risks and consequences of unionization before employees would vote on whether to turn over their individual rights to a union.

Through its substantial rule-making authority, the NLRB is also poised to impose further restrictions on what is considered ‘employer free speech’ under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), expanding union access to employer premises for the purpose of organizing, imposing limitations on employers communications to employees during organizing campaigns, use of employer technology to promote union organizing, and supervisory issues relating to eligibility to unionize.

Further, evidence already exists in recent decisions as to the NLRB’s proclivity to redefine what are considered employer unfair labor practices. All of these changes are aimed at allowing unions almost unfettered and unchallenged access to employees. These are just a few examples demonstrating the significance of the political makeup of NLRB given the substantial rule-making authority afforded to the board and its ability to shape labor law precedent and set guidelines for future organizing campaigns. While employers have been focusing their fear on potential legislation like the Employee Free Choice Act, the NLRB’s exercise of its rule-making authority could prove to be a powerful, expeditious approach in lieu of legislative action. Many fear that through its efforts, the new NLRB could easily wipe out business-supportive policy decisions of the Bush era and could move even further to the left, creating a polarizing labor bias not seen in decades.

It is not only the NLRB that is changing its perspective. In addition to significant changes to the NLRB, appointment of key labor leaders to influential administration positions also signals a new climate of increased labor influence. A few of the numerous key administrative appointments include: SEIU Executive Vice President, Anna Burger’s and AFL-CIO Secretary-Treasurer, Richard Trumka’s appointments to the Economic Recovery Advisory Board, and Former SEIU Finance and Administration leader, Michael Kerr, appointed to Labor Department Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management.

One prime example of this new direction can be seen in recent activities involving the Federal Railway Labor Act (FRLA). The FRLA, which also covers the airlines, has always had different rules than the NLRA (including the inability to ever decertify a union once it is voted in by the current employees); this leaves employees with only the option to change unions if they are dissatisfied with their union representation. Because of this particular rule, the FRLA requires that the union obtain a majority of everyone who is eligible to vote for the union, not a simple majority of those who actually vote, as required under the NLRA. This rule was changed in the spring of 2010, eliminating this higher requirement and almost immediately resulting in the unions going after one of the few remaining mostly union-free airlines—Delta Air Lines.

Further, Mary K. Henry’s rise to the presidency of SEIU, on the heels of the unexpected retirement of Andrew Stern, likely signals an increased focus on grassroots organizing given Henry’s claim that SEIU will increase its membership by 120,000 new union members by the end of the 2010—a lofty goal.

It is too early to tell whether Henry will successfully balance this recommitment to organizing while also striving to build upon the political strength and focus built under Stern’s leadership, or whether she will forge her own path, but what is certain is that SEIU will continue to be a force to be reckoned with in health care organizing for the foreseeable future.

Also on the rise is the new super RN union, National Nurses United (NNU), created by the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee and several other state nursing associations. While still a relatively new kid on the block, NNU recently flexed its strength at the University of Chicago, successfully winning an election to represent approximately 1,200 registered nurses previously represented by the Illinois Nurses Association.

When will employers feel the impact of these changes?
Many changes are already in process, but it is likely the most serious changes will not occur until after the November 2010 electiona—keeping the administration’s plan of attack under the political radar is important. The unions are not as willing to be patient. Over $10 million of union members’ money was spent in the Arkansas senate democratic primary alone for the purpose of ‘punishing’ a senator who had not supported the union agenda. In some ways, labor’s only avenue is to take a negative approach, since the entire union structure is supported by the concept of ‘extortion’ and ‘attack.’ The basis of striking is to harm the organization at a higher level than simply forcing the employer to give in to the union’s demands. It was with this mindset that the unions attacked one of their own democratic party leaders, without the support of the White House and even counter-action by former President Bill Clinton.

The political and economic events of the past several months should be taken as a small warning of what is to come, as the next six months are expected to be a relative period of calm before Big Labor’s wrath is fully realized after the November 2010 mid-term elections. We believe the path health care employers choose to take over the next six months will likely separate those organizations who are able to successfully remain union-free in 2011 and beyond from those that find themselves unprepared and at the mercy of the new environment as it relates to union organizing. We have likely all heard about the "new normal" our nation faces from an economic standpoint; we suggest a "new normal" in the realm of labor relations is upon us as well.

Organizations that use this critical period of opportunity to train their front-line leaders, establish strategic rapid response teams, and conduct surveys and/or baseline assessments of their environment with a commitment to respond to and address employee concerns, will be those that are best positioned to succeed in the "new normal" environment. Organizations that take a "wait and see" approach may find themselves not only an early target for a union that has done its homework to assess the most favorable opponents, but also may be unable to respond quickly enough or effectively enough under the anticipated new NLRB guidelines.

Regardless of what the future holds for the Employee Free Choice Act and/or for the partisan make-up in Congress post-November 2010, it is clear that enough chips are stacked in favor of Big Labor given recent political appointments, new labor coalitions, new union leadership, and the continued volatile economic conditions across the country, to allow unions a much more favorable platform for organizing than anything experienced by unions since the late 1970s and early 1980s.

Given the rapidly changing landscape, health care leaders have a window of opportunity over the next six months to take proactive, protective steps to ensure they are positioned appropriately to continue with the normal course of business while effectively responding should a union come knocking, rather than operating on the defensive on a playing field that is certain to become more tilted in favor of the opponent.

Right now, labor leaders are simultaneously focused on the mid-term elections and protecting pro-labor seats in congress as well as positioning their ground crew of organizers by planning seeds. Increased reports of early-stage union surveillance and canvassing from health care organizations we partner with in many parts of the country are already starting to pop up. After the November 2010 elections, labor will likely turn its focus solely to increased grassroots in labor organizing attempts. In fact, much of the groundwork is already being laid, albeit with great care so as not to upset the political dynamic before the elections any more than absolutely necessary.

The bottom line is that health care employers would be wise to take advantage of this period in time, while unions are operating cautiously, so as to not upset the political climate prior to the November 2010 elections. Employers who wisely utilize this opportunity to inoculate their organizations now through training, education, and creating a foundation for a strategic labor relations plan that could be effectively implemented in the face of expedited elections and a labor-friendly NLRB, will find themselves able to operate with less distractions and less potential risk regardless of labor’s next big move compared to those that risk a "wait and see" approach.

Becky Brown JD, SPHR—Senior Vice President, MSA HR Capital
Becky Brown’s nationwide consulting practice spans a broad array of human resource capital areas, including management to employee relationships and communication improvement, employee and leadership surveys, positive employee and preventive labor strategies, and performance management redesign. Brown’s health care HR capital experience combined with her legal background and dynamic presentation and coaching abilities make her uniquely adept at approaching today’s labor issues from an insightful, management perspective. Brown has been asked to speak at national and state health care and human resource organizations as well as on-site seminars and leadership training for health care executives, boards of directors, and thousands of health care managers and supervisors nationwide.
Prior to joining Integrated Healthcare Strategies, Brown’s legal practice included representation of individuals and companies in a variety of labor and employment related matters. You may contact Brown at
Becky.Brown@IHStrategies.com or by calling 816-795-1947.

Kevin Haeberle, JD—Executive Vice President and Practice Leader, MSA HR Capital
Kevin Haeberle’s experience includes over 20 years as consultant, attorney, and a health care administrator. Kevin brings a unique expertise to the consulting partnerships he has developed with health care organizations nationwide. Prior to joining IHStrategies, Kevin was a senior vice president of an award-winning health care system. As a nationally recognized expert in human resource issues and preventive labor relations strategies, he has developed long lasting senior level client relationships with some of the nation’s most prestigious health care institutions. By combining his knowledge and expertise in human capital management with an administrative and financial approach, Kevin has been successful in developing plans and systems that support the chief executive and financial officers, as well as the chief human resources officer. A sought-after speaker, Kevin has presented at numerous national and state health care organizations. Bringing a high level of energy, enthusiasm, and professional humor to all projects is one of Kevin’s trademarks, as well as introducing challenging and thought-provoking ideas to long-standing human capital issues. Kevin can be contacted at 816-795-1947 or
kevin.haeberle@ihstrategies.com

About Integrated Healthcare Strategies
Integrated Healthcare Strategies provides not-for-profit health care organizations with direct access to a comprehensive array of healthcare-specific services, delivered by professionals from the industry who understand the rigors of running a health care organization—from the lunchroom to the board room. Its client list is a "who’s who" of health care organizations including over 1,200 major health care providers, 1,800 hospitals, and 700 independent and affiliated medical groups. Integrated Healthcare Strategies specializes in the areas of physician strategy and compensation, employee compensation, executive compensation, human capital solutions, labor relations, leadership transition planning, executive search, employee surveys, performance management, and board governance solutions.

The MSA HR Capital labor team, comprised of attorneys and human capital experts, understand the high level strategic issues as well as day-to-day in the trenches work essential to a successful campaign outcome and how both pieces must be appropriately balanced with day-to-day operational needs. The MSA HR Capital team also provides comparative data on over 1,000 hospital organizations to tailor solutions to each client organization specific to work environment to ensure they reach their objectives by integrating management, compensation, labor relations, and employee engagement goals into one seamless operating strategy. For more information, visit www.IHStrategies.com or call 800-821-8481.

 

Some say social networking is the best thing that has happened to recruiting. After all, what every employer is looking for is the finest talent available because the success of an organization depends upon the skills and dedication of its employees. More importantly, individuals and organizations are most effective when their respective values, goals, and interests are aligned. It is a well-known fact that the industry of recruiting and interviewing needed to change drastically to address the issues businesses face when they do not properly match an individual to the position. These issues include turnover, poor morale, burnout, and employee relations issues. Unfortunately, the interviewing process alone does not identify the behavioral factors that are essential to determine a good cultural match between the job candidate and the organization.

The decision to hire someone in the past was based on a resume and an interview which identified an individual’s skills and education. However, employees are generally fired for their poor behavior. Most managers spent 90 percent of their time on employees who have behavioral issues that create a disruption to the work environment. Of every ten individuals who are asked to leave a job only one individual is asked to leave because he or she does not possess the skills necessary to successfully complete the work. This is a clear indication that behavioral issues and social patterns that are not detected in the traditional interview process are very costly.

Is the answer to use social networking sites to identify these behavioral issues and social patterns? According to a survey conducted by IT Business Edge, over 66 percent of the respondents had already used social networking sites to identify and hire job candidates and another 13 percent of the respondents plan to start using social networking sites this coming year as a major part of their recruiting process. There is no doubt that social networking sites are becoming a very popular recruiting tool. In a webinar recently hosted by Taleo and Pinstripe it was revealed that social networks may help fill in the missing links to a recruiter’s recruitment strategies. The missing links that are revealed on MySpace, Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn may be the difference between hiring a good match for an organization and hiring someone that will not support the culture of the organization.

On some of the more informal sites such as Facebook, a person’s age, marital status, sex, sexual orientation, religion, and political affiliation are frequently available. Furthermore, if the individual uploads a picture an employer can usually guess the ethnicity of the individual. Many recruiters would agree that this is valuable information, but is there a downside to this? Can a recruiter create potential legal issues for the organization by using information found on social networks to make a hiring decision?

It is reasonable to assume that everyone should know what they provide online is open to the public. However, that may not always be true. Furthermore, even though the information is open to the public, whether it should be used in the hiring process can create ethical and legal issues.

Here are some general recommendations to consider: remember, you should always seek legal advice from corporate counsel about the advisability of using online searches. This is not an exhaustive list, just a few things to think about.

  • Job applicants are protected by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. This law makes it illegal to discriminate against someone on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex. If you gather information that may include details of a person’s protected characteristics, can it lead to an appearance of discrimination?
  • Many times individuals fail to realize that what they are disclosing on a social network to their friends and networks are public in nature. So, that brings about the question of, as an employer, are you tapping into information that is breaching an individual’s privacy rights, particularly when it comes to health information?
  • Issues related to ethics provide another quandary. From an ethical standpoint, what is acceptable and what is unacceptable to use in determining whether a job candidate will be successful in an organization? There certainly needs to be some organizational guidelines established. The hard part is monitoring this process.
  • Last but certainly not least, what about the accuracy of the information gathered? Remember, social networking sites are primarily used to connect or reconnect with former business associates, friends, and high school and/or college acquaintances. However, these sites are also used to impress others. It would not be unusual for someone to stretch the truth a little. Anyone who has been in the recruiting business for any length of time knows that resumes are frequently embellished. When trying to impress an old classmate, one might very easily embellish a little.

As the economy improves and the labor market tightens, it will be necessary to continue to seek alternate or nontraditional methods to determine whether a candidate is a good match to an organization. However, organizations need to be aware of the risks involved. Discrimination claims filed with the EEOC have been on a steady increase since 2007. In 2008, there was a 15 percent increase in the number of claims from the previous year. More than 25 percent of the total claims filed were related to age discrimination. An ideal example of a situation that could bring about an age discrimination claim is if someone was not hired as a result of his or her age being known to the employer through a social network.

It is a well-known fact that LinkedIn is a social networking site many baby boomers use. An example of a situation that caused one employer a considerable amount of time and money is when a recruiter made a judgment call to not hire a very qualified job candidate because what was revealed on LinkedIn lead the recruiter to believe that the candidate was over 50 years old. As a result, a younger and less qualified individual was hired. One probably is wondering how the more qualified applicant found out what happened. To make a long story short, the answer is "you never really know who your friend is and who your adversary may be on a social networking site"! In this particular case, it was difficult to defend the recruiter’s decision. Situations of this nature not only create a liability for the organization, but may also tarnish the employer’s reputation.

At the very least, recruiters should track the information that is acquired through social networking sites and how it is used in the hiring process. This will add a significant amount of work to the process, but it would be time well spent if a claim of discrimination is filed. The goal is to record information that could be used to defend the recruiter’s actions.

As we all know, there are many risks out there, organizations need to decide how much risk they are willing to tolerate and if the risks outweigh the benefits!

Dr. Kathleen Dodaro, President of Dodaro & Associates HR and Business Consulting. Dodaro and Associates is a national consulting and training company based out of Denver, CO. It is comprised of a group of individuals who are passionate about helping organizations increase their return on their human capital investment.

 
Purchasing Power
Naylor, LLC
BENEFITS

It is common knowledge the health care industry is facing a workforce crisis due to an aging population and fewer primary care physicians and nurses entering the field. The American Medical News survey of hospital CEOs reports an 11 percent vacancy rate already for doctors, while a July/August 2009 report from Health Affairs states the U.S. nursing shortage is projected to grow to 260,000 registered nurses by 2025.

This workforce shortage is more than a pain point for the executives and HR managers who staff for them. It’s also taking a toll on current employees within health care organizations, impacting job satisfaction, and driving many health care providers to leave the profession. Personal life stressors, such as child care or elder care issues, also contribute to increased absenteeism, which can magnify the workforce shortages when there are fewer employees to cover shifts.

To solve this dilemma, many leading health care organizations have found success through a comprehensive work/life benefits strategy. Organizations today are working diligently to create a better work environment through increased flexibility in scheduling, sponsoring child care, backup care and providing assistance with elder care. These "care" benefit programs are proving invaluable in the fight to reduce absenteeism, help recruitment efforts of younger nurses and retain older, more experienced health care workers.

Reducing absenteeism by closing child care gaps for employees
"Family issues" accounted for 22 percent of unscheduled absences, according to the 2006-7 Unscheduled Absenteeism Surveys by CCH Incorporated. Unscheduled absenteeism costs some large employers an estimated $850,000 per year in direct payroll costs and even more when morale, temporary labor costs and lost productivity are added. By having on-site or near-site child care and backup care programs, health care facilities afford working parents access to reliable services on a daily basis, so they have fewer unscheduled absences.

HR managers often report that employees admit they feel more productive at work because they know their children are well cared for and nearby. Moreover, working mothers are less likely to leave their job to pursue other opportunities and more likely to return to work after the birth of a child because of the benefit.

Attract younger workers to the field
In July 2007, a report released by PricewaterhouseCoopers’ Health Research Institute found that average voluntary turnover for first-year nurses was 27.1 percent. Healthcare organizations seeking to attract and retain these workers—many of whom may be parents of young children –have found that near-site or on-site child care helps them achieve this goal. Many young job seekers consider work/life benefits such as this an important factor in their decision to join an organization. When they look for an employer, they are more likely to seek out organizations that understand the challenges employees face in trying to strike a healthy work/life balance.

A study by researchers at Simmons College found that at companies with on-site child care, 42 percent of employees cited child care as the reason they’d joined the company, and one out of five said they’d passed up an opportunity elsewhere because they wanted to keep their kids at the company center.

Retain experienced, highly-skilled workers by reducing elder care stressors
Baby-boomers are often referred to as the "sandwich generation," assuming responsibilities for taking care of grandchildren and aging or sick parents. One in four employees currently provides some kind of care for an elderly relative. And, a recent national study by the MetLife Mature Market Institute, the National Alliance for Caregiving and the National Center on Women and Aging found that to balance work and elder care duties, more than a third of these caregivers cut their hours. Further, nearly a quarter took a leave of absence, 16 percent quit their jobs and 13 percent retired early.

These statistics indicate a knowledge and experience gap that is getting harder to fill. For older, highly skilled workers, many forward thinking organizations are helping by providing information on local support services and resources available to help with elder care while the caregiver works. Still others host seminars and support groups to help co-workers deal with the legal and emotional issues that can arise and affect their work/life balance. By offering referrals to resources as well as flexibility in scheduling, health care facilities will likely retain more workers and build employee loyalty.

Cleveland Clinic minimizes employees’ worry about child care
A growing number of health care organizations are offering work/life benefit programs today including non-profits, and those associated with nursing or medical schools.

The Cleveland Clinic, a multi-specialty academic medical center headquartered in Ohio, is an employer of choice for more than 40,000 workers. It prides itself in developing what it calls the "Cleveland Clinic Experience," an atmosphere where employees are valued and rewarded with great benefits such as competitive base pay, wellness programs and a generous tuition reimbursement offering.

About six years ago it began offering employer-sponsored child care at their main campus in response to requests from nurses and other employees who wished for greater flexibility to visit their children during lunch hours and breaks.

While the center is open to the local community, Cleveland Clinic employees get priority enrollment and 80 of its families currently take advantage of the benefit. The center offers a customized solution for the hospital including extended hours of care, backup care, drop-in service and other programs such as a winter break backup program for school-age children. Moreover, the center provides child care services to patients’ visitors staying at the clinic’s hotel if part- or full-time care is needed.

The response from parents has been overwhelmingly positive according to Cleveland Clinic’s Mila Henn, Executive Director of Operations. "I’m constantly getting thank you notes from parents telling me how much they appreciate the center. Parents say they work more effectively knowing that their children are nearby and in a safe, loving environment."

Getting started: first, evaluate the need, then structure the program
Healthcare organizations considering offering child care programs as part of their work/life benefits should consider some initial steps to take. Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) in Portland, Oregon, recently announced the intention of opening a near-site child care center in the fall of 2010.

For several years, OHSU knew there was a strong demand for a child care center based on frequent queries from current and potential employees and a 2008 survey of students and employees. Although they didn’t track reasons for absences, executives also suspected employees often stayed home because of sick children or because they didn’t have reliable day care. Child care and backup care, executives believed, would help reduce absences as well as the need for temporary help, and aid retention and recruitment.

As a first step, OHSU began the process of finding an experienced care partner by forming a Child Care Advisory Council to aid in the process. The council, representing a broad spectrum of employees, met regularly to review survey data, information they gathered on other organizations’ child care programs, and to evaluate providers based on the criteria they wanted to meet.

"Ultimately the vendor we selected had extensive experience in setting up unique, high-quality child care programs for other health care organizations nationwide," said Rick Bentzinger, Vice President of Human Resources. "Their corporate values aligned well with OHSU from an emphasis on creating a positive learning environment, to their experience and focus on eco-construction. On a practical level, the location they secured and the number of kids they could accommodate was favorable, and they could work with our funding needs."

Location of the child care center was a major factor for OHSU. Due to space constraints on its campus, building on-site wasn’t an option, nor was building a new facility because of the cost of real estate in the area. CCLC helped to locate a nearby building, secure a lease, develop remodeling plans, and devise a funding structure that fit well within OHSU’s financial parameters.

OHSU also conducted a more detailed survey later testing assumptions about likely use based on location for the center, programs available, tuition rates and hours of operation. Feedback was positive. More than 860 students and employees—representing 963 children—said they would likely enroll immediately.

OHSU is hopeful that by thoroughly assessing the need, involving employees early on, and working with an experienced child care provider their program will meet the needs of their employees, while reinforcing their positive reputation within the local community.

ROI for employers is clear
Recent studies estimate that providing backup child care for employees can cut employee turnover among users by as much as 23 percent, and a child care center could save as much as $500,000 annually in turnover costs—10 retained workers at $50,000 per worker. A typical return on investment for care giving benefits are estimated at least three to one.

The health care workforce is constantly changing and competition continues to be fierce; making it as important as ever to maintain a competitive edge, find and retain the best employees, and be seen as a great place to work. Offering work/life benefits that meet the needs of a diverse population of employees will not only reduce turnover and absenteeism, but make employees feel less stressed and more productive, enhancing the organization’s image as an employer of choice, and providing a good return on investment.

Fran Durekas is Founder and Chief Development Officer for CCLC. In this capacity, she provides executive leadership and support for new center openings, long-term strategy development for centers and client relations. She also assists with center design, construction and program recommendations. CCLC operates the Cleveland Children’s Academy for the Cleveland Clinic Foundation and is working with OHSU in developing their new on-site center in Portland, Oregon. For more information, e-mail info@cclc.com.

 
HealthcareSource
Universal Background Screening
Naylor, LLC
Naylor, LLC
Naylor, LLC
Naylor, LLC
Naylor, LLC

ASHHRA Mission

To advance the human side of health care, the American Society for Healthcare Human Resources Administration (ASHHRA) leads the way for highly effective, valued, and credible leaders.


Contact:

ASHHRA
155 North Wacker,
Suite 400
Chicago, IL  60606
Phone: 312.422.3720
Fax: 312.422.4577
Email:ashhra@aha.org

FOLLOW US ON

FacebookTwitterLinkedIn

Visit HRPulse

 

Visit ASHHRA.org

155 North Wacker, Suite 400
Chicago, IL 60606
Ph.: 312.422.3720
Fax: 312.422.4577
E-mail: ashhra@aha.org
Website: www.ashhra.org

We would appreciate your comments or suggestions. Your email will be kept private and confidential.