CHAPTER 11 – Employee Benefits

Case Study 1: Adobe’s Family-Friendly Benefits: An

Unexpected Backlash

Adobe Consulting Services (ACS), a provider of HR software application systems, prides itself

on the variety of benefits it offers employees. In addition to health care, pension, and vacation

benefits, the company also offers an attractive family-friendly benefits package including

flexible schedules, child and elder care assistance, counseling services, adoption assistance, and

extended parental leave. Unfortunately, in recent months, the company’s progressive work-life

policy has experienced a backlash from several employees, as the following case illustrates.

In March 20011, Teresa Wheatly was hired by Adobe as a software accounts manager. With

excellent administrative and technical skills, plus four years of experience at Adaptable

Software, Adobe’s main competitor, Teresa became a valued addition to the company’s

marketing team. As a single mother with two grade- school children, Teresa received permission

to take Fridays off. She was also allowed to leave work early or come in late to meet the

demands of her children. Teresa is one of 11 software account managers at Adobe.

The problem for Adobe, and particularly for Janis Blancero, director of marketing, began in the

fall of 2011. On September 15, Dorothy McShee, citing “personal reasons”—which she refused

to discuss— requested a four-day workweek for which she was willing to take a 20 percent cut in

pay. When Dorothy asked for the reduced work schedule, she sarcastically quipped, “I hope I

don’t have to have kids to get this time off.” On October 3, Juan Batista, a world- class marathon

runner, requested a flexible work hours arrangement to accommodate his morning and afternoon

training schedule. Juan was registered to run the London, England, marathon in May 2013. Just

prior to Juan’s request, Susan Woolf asked for and was granted an extended maternity leave to

begin after the birth of her first child in December.

If these unexpected requests are not enough, Blancero has heard comments from senior account

managers about how some employees seem to get “special privileges,” while the managers work

long hours that often require them to meet around-the- clock customer demands. Janis has

adequate reason to believe that there is hidden tension over the company’s flexible work hours

program. Currently, Adobe has no formal policy on flexible schedules. Furthermore, with the

company’s growth in business combined with the increasing workload of software account

managers and the constant service demands of some customers, Blancero realizes that she simply

cannot grant all the time-off requests of her employees.

Questions:

1. Do managers like Janis Blancero face a more com- plicated decision when evaluating the

personal requests of employees versus evaluating employees’ individual work performance?

Explain.

2. a. Should Adobe establish a policy for granting flexible work schedules? Explain.

b. If you answered yes, what might that policy contain?

3. If you were Janis Blancero, how would you resolve this dilemma? Explain

Case Study 2 – Evaluate the Work-Life Climate in Your Company

What is the quality of the work-life environment in your company? The following survey

provided by the Work and Family Connection will help provide a “case analysis” of the climate

in your organization. Answers to the 20 questions will provide clear insights about your

company’s position in the work-life area.

Agree or Disagree with the Following Statements:

1. My manager or supervisor treats my work-life needs with sensitivity.

2. It is usually easy for me to manage the demands of both work and home life.

3. My career path at this company is limited be- cause of the pressure of home life demands.

4. My job at this company keeps me from maintaining the quality of life I want.

5. My manager or supervisor is supportive when home life issues interfere with work.

6. My manager or supervisor focuses on results, rather than the time I am at my desk.

7. My manager or supervisor has a good under- standing of flexible work hour practices.

8. If I requested a flexible work arrangement, my manager or supervisor would support me.

9. My manager or supervisor is often inflexible or insensitive about my personal needs.

10. I believe my manager or supervisor treats me with respect.

11. My manager or supervisor allows me informal flexibility as long as I get the job done.

12. My manager or supervisor tends to treat us like children.

13. My manager or supervisor seldom gives me praise or recognition for the work I do

14. My manager or supervisor seems to care about me as a person.

15. I would recommend this company to others. 16. The work I do is not all that important to this

company’s success.

17. If I could find another job with better pay, I would leave this organization.

18. If I could find another job where I would be treated with respect, I would take it.

19. If I could find another job where I could have more flexibility, I would take it.

20. I am totally committed to this company.

For a perfect score, you should answer “Disagree” to questions 3, 4, 9, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, and 19

and “Agree” to all the rest, 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 14, 15, and 20.

To score, begin by giving yourself 20 points. Then deduct one point for every “wrong” response

from the total score.

If your score is 18 to 20: Congratulations! Your organization is leading the nation in flexibility

and supportiveness.

If your score is 14 to 17: Your organization is probably more supportive and flexible than most,

but you have room to grow.

If your score is 11 to 13: You could be open to other job offers in the race for talent among

employees.

If your score is 10 or less: Your managers will need help to manage the twenty-first-century

workforce.

CHAPTER 12 – Promoting Safety and Health

Case Study 1 – Rambo Goes Violent

The facts of the case are straightforward. A shop floor dispute at an automobile parts

manufacturing plant in Hamilton, Iowa, ended with one worker killing another. At about 2:00

p.m., police responded to a report of a fight that erupted between two employees. When

members of the Hamilton Police Department’s Violent Crime Unit arrived, they found Mark

Lomas seriously injured. Lomas, 30, died three hours later at Good Samaritan Memorial

Hospital. The other employee, Thomas Waycross, was charged with second-degree murder.

During the investigation of the incident, employees noted that Lomas and Waycross often

“bickered” when working together. One employee remarked that Waycross liked to “act tough.”

Another employee claimed that Waycross had a “Rambo-type” personality. It was widely known

that management had told both employees to “learn to get along” or quit.

When asked about the incident, police spokes- person Kathy Calder remarked, “Employers must

be vigilant when monitoring for signs of potential work- place violence.” Nancy Lomas, Mark’s

wife, has filed a negligence lawsuit against the company.

Questions:

1. What are some violence indicators an employee might display?

2. What are some actions management can take to help prevent workplace violence?

3. How can employees protect themselves against workplace violence

Case Study 2 – Too Much Fatigue and Stress? You

Decide

Job fatigue and stress are significant problems faced by employees and their managers.

Unfortunately, when a case of depression arises as a result, trying to resolve the problem may be

difficult—sometimes leading to conflict—as this case illustrates.

Donald Knolls was an air traffic control super- visor for International Gateway Airport (IGA), an

airport serving a major metropolitan area. In 2011, Donald began to experience depression-

related problems largely due to severe stress and fatigue on the job. A few months later, he

requested and was granted a disability leave for treatment of his illness. After eight months, his

personal physician, an expert in depression treatment and a licensed consulting psychologist,

agreed that he was sufficiently improved to return to his former position.

IGA then sent Donald to the physician it had used when Donald first requested his disability

leave. After an extensive evaluation, the doctor concluded that while Donald had made

considerable strides in overcoming his depression, he should not be immediately returned to his

former supervisory position because the conditions of the job had not changed and he was apt to

find the stress too great. Instead, he recommended that Donald be returned to a non- supervisory

position on a six-month trial basis, with the case to be reviewed at the end of that time. IGA

followed the advice of its doctor and did not return Donald to a supervisory position. Donald,

angered by management’s decision, filed a grievance through IGA’s alternative dispute

resolution procedure, a procedure that could end in binding arbitration.

During several meetings between Donald and management, the employer maintained that it had

the right to rely on the medical opinion of “a fair and impartial” doctor who had determined that

Donald should not be returned to the position that was the cause of his original stress-related

emotional problems. Additionally, management pointed out to Donald that IGA’s disability leave

provision states that it “may require appropriate medical documentation if it believes an

employee is not fit to return to his or her former position.”

Donald responded, through an attorney he hired to represent his position, that the disability leave

provisions were clear but, nevertheless, biased against an employee because they completely

disregarded the opinion of his physician and psychologist. According to Donald, “Why bother to

get expert medical opinions if they are dis- missed?” He further noted, “I have never felt better.

I’m really ready to get back to my job.” Finally, Donald’s lawyer contended that Donald was the

victim of discrimination based on his former state of depression: “What happened to Donald

would not have happened if his illness had been a more conventional physical injury.”

Questions:

1. When conflicting medical opinions are presented, should the advice of a medical expert count

more heavily than the opinion of a general physician? Explain your answer.

2. Is the charge of discrimination presented by Donald’s lawyer relevant to this case? Explain

your answer.

3. If you were presented with this case, what decision would you reach? Explain.

Chapter 12 Promoting Safety and Health

Copyright ©2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.

Learning Outcomes

Summarize the general provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA)

Describe the measures managers and employees can take to create a safe work environment

Identify ways to control and eliminate various on-the-job health hazards

Describe the programs organizations utilize to build better health among their workforces

2

Copyright ©2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.