Robo-advisers play increasingly important role
Are you reaching all of your employee's for financial advising? Robo-advisers allow employee's to review materials in their own time but it's important to find the right balance. See the article below from Employee Benefit Adviser by Nick Otto on the potential perks of Robo-advisers.
Original article posted on EmployeeBenefitAdviser.co
Posted on September 29, 2016
Technology is increasingly evolving: from miniature scanners that monitor a cancer patient’s chemotherapy treatments right down to financial advice being offered to more than just the 1%.
The retirement landscape should no longer be a one-size-fits-all approach, said Andrew Wank, director of business development at Bloom. From the DIY to the HENRYs (high earners not rich yet), there is a middle group of employees that can be a challenge to reach in providing retirement advice, he added.
Robo-advisers lend themselves to helping employees in all aspects of life, Wank said Wednesday at EBA's Workplace Benefits Summit in Nashville, Tenn. “Plan sponsors recognize the limitations of what they’re already doing,” he said. “How can we provide a service or solution?”
Robo-advisers can be that solution, panelists agreed, because they reach all kinds of employees who don’t have easy access to financial advice. It combines technology with a human touch to most benefit employees, Wank said.
“Selecting a robo-adviser is going to be the same sort of process as picking your adviser,” added The Wagner Law Group’s Tom Clark, in agreement. “Make the decision in the best interest of your plan participants.”
And with the DOL’s effects coming into play in April, Betterment for Business’ General Manager, Cynthia Loh, added that while the final rule is widely talked about, it still isn’t very well understood.
“Explore all your options out there,” she advised. “Employees are more likely to engage with digital tools they can look at on their time. But given where we are today, it’s prudent with the DOL rule coming, on what’s out there. Make sure you understand what your fees are and what your employees are getting and what your employees’ needs are.”
See the Original Article Here.
Source:
Otto, N. (2016, September 29). Robo-advisers play increasingly important role [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://www.employeebenefitadviser.com/news/robo-advisers-play-increasingly-important-role
Travel is millennials’ work incentive
Do you know what millennials are looking for in the workplace? Travel and flexibility are among the top 2 as mentioned in the article below by Marlenen Y. Satter.
Original Article Posted on BenefitsPro.com
Posted: October 7, 2016
Millennials have itchy feet.
In fact, their desire to see faraway places is their main reason to work — after, of course, paying basic necessities. According to FlexJobs survey, a hefty 70 percent of millennials say their “overwhelming desire to travel” is their main motivation on the job — that’s just a tad less than the 88 percent who cite that basic motivator: necessities.
Gen X respondents are fond of travel too, but not as much as millennials; 60 percent ranked it as the fourth most important reason for working. And boomers are apparently settling down; just 47 percent ranked travel as fifth in importance.
Not only are millennials wanderers, they want flexibility — up to a point. Freelance work seems to be going farther than they’d like (particularly since at least some of that “flexibility” is really out of a freelancer’s control and in the hands of clients).
Although millennials tend to be more associated with freelance work than other generations, only 42 percent of millennials are open to freelancing as a flexible work arrangement.
Gen Xers actually view freelance work more favorably than millennials, with 47 percent willing to consider it. Forty-four percent of boomers also expressed interest in freelancing.
Flexibility, on the other hand, is important enough to millennials that 82 percent say it’s a factor in evaluating a potential job, and 34 percent have actually left a job because it did not have work flexibility. In addition, 82 percent say they’d be more loyal to an employer if they had flexible work options.
Yet, although they’re the ones most interested in flexibility, millennials are also the generation most required to be at the office to work than older generations: 34 percent, compared with Gen Xers at 26 percent and boomers at 19 percent. Their work schedule — part of that flexibility — is also important to more millennials (65 percent) than it is to Gen Xers (57 percent) or to boomers (62 percent).
Interestingly, though, none of the generations regard the office during traditional working hours as their location of choice for optimum productivity.
See the Original Article Here.
Source:
Satter, M.Y. (2016, October 7) Travel is millennials' work incentive [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://www.benefitspro.com/2016/10/07/travel-is-millennials-work-incentive?ref=hp-top-stories
5 Steps that can bring you closer to ACA compliance
Vic Saliterman shares 5 steps to help advisers and organizations focus on ACA compliance efforts as the heathcare market system continues to morph.
Original Article Posted on EmployeBenefitAdviser.com
Posted: September 27, 2016
1) Validate the ACA status of employees every month. Identifying who is eligible to be offered coverage under ACA rules is a core ingredient of attaining compliance and can be challenging and complex. In the 2016 plan year, the number of full-time employees who must be offered healthcare coverage increased to 95% from 70% in 2015 — a much higher threshold. Validating each month is far easier and far less stressful than doing so all at once at the end of the year.
a. Categorizing your employees incorrectly can lead to negative consequences such as unanticipated penalties. Keep in mind that any Employer Shared Responsibility assessments are determined independently for each month, even though reporting and IRS notices will be annual. So you should assess monthly to make sure you’re hitting the 95% mark. It also pays to know the difference between “HR full-time” and “ACA full-time” definitions.
2) Gather the correct data now — especially benefits data. According to an ADP study, many organizations have said that it was extremely challenging to gather benefits and payroll data for the annual reporting task of completing Forms 1094-C/1095-C for 2015. HR and finance leaders underestimated the time and effort needed to obtain the correct data from the necessary systems, such as benefits, payroll, time and labor management, and HR. In addition, source data may have resided in non-integrated systems or was inconsistent with ACA definitions, resulting in a time-consuming task of analyzing and adjusting it manually. Employers anticipate that the accuracy of forms, annual reporting, and affordability measures will be their top ACA challenges in 2016. So, begin to gather the correct employee data now.
3) Address Marketplace Notices sooner rather than later. Receiving a Marketplace Notice is like an early warning system. It can alert you that there may be a problem before a fine occurs. Understanding the implications of receiving a notice can help you prepare to manage the situation in the most efficient and cost-effective way possible. Acting now may save your business the expense of penalties later.
a. A Marketplace Notice is generated by an individual state’s Marketplace or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services whenever an employee receives a premium tax credit to help them pay for healthcare coverage from state or federal marketplaces. The notice gives the employer a chance to appeal the premium tax credit eligibility if they did offer the employee affordable healthcare coverage.
b. An ADP study found that among large employers, those with 1,000 or more employees, 23% said that “responding to Exchange Notices” is their top ACA compliance concern for 2016. For large employers handling compliance on their own, the percentage rose to 27%. One thing to keep in mind is that the notice will be sent to the address provided by the employee, which means it may not go where you expect. So, it may be important to educate and alert local work locations that may receive these notices.
c. In fact, receiving a Marketplace Notice for an employee is an opportunity to look at the coverage offered and verify that your business complies. If appropriate coverage is not being offered, the notice gives you time to make an offer and potentially limit any penalty that may be assessed by the IRS.
4) Pay attention to the “little” things. Did you know that there were nearly 170 IRS error codes for 2015 that could have applied to Form 1094-C/1095-C transmissions? Some errors were technical in nature (format, schema, etc.) whereas others were based on data provided. The point is simple mistakes can lead to rejected IRS forms or accuracy penalties.
a. Many of these errors were the result of inaccurate Social Security numbers, Tax Identification Numbers (TINs), Federal Employer Identification Numbers (FEINs) and, believe it or not, incorrectly listing a company’s legal name. It may help to become familiar with the TIN solicitation rules. In 2015 reporting, the IRS said it will not impose penalties on a filer for reporting incorrect or incomplete information if the filer can show that he or she made a good-faith effort to comply with the information reporting requirements for 2015. But that won’t be the case moving forward.
b. And there are other potential penalties. At some point — likely December 2016 or early 2017 for 2015 filings — you may receive an Employer Shared Responsibility assessment notice from the IRS. The only way you can avoid paying those penalty assessments is by showing the IRS that you, in fact, complied. You’ll need to be able to show who was a full-time employee for each month, who was offered coverage, and whether that coverage met affordability standards. Make sure that several years of employee data is available because you may need that employee history to respond to an IRS inquiry.
5) Look ahead. ACA compliance will continue to be an evolving activity as laws and requirements change. For instance, annual reporting and Form 1095-C will have some new codes, such as “plan start month” (optional for 2015 and 2016) and two new Line 14 codes to identify conditional offers to spouses. Most 2015 transition relief codes will remain for any 2015 plan-year months in 2016. And that’s not all. The IRS also has issued a proposed rule on expatriates and expatriate plans. Begin to familiarize yourself with these planned and proposed changes today, so your overall compliance process becomes more routine.
Managing the requirements of the ACA as a part of day-to-day HR and finance activities doesn’t have to be overwhelming, but you do need to get started.
By engaging a knowledgeable, trusted partner and applying a little diligence and forethought, adhering to ACA rules can begin to integrate into your ongoing operating model.
See the Original Article Here.
Source:
Saliterman, V. (2016, September 27). 5 steps that can bring you closer to ACA compliance [Web log post]. Retrieved from https://www.employeebenefitadviser.com/opinion/5-steps-that-can-bring-you-closer-to-aca-compliance
Congress moves to push back effective date of new OT rules
Interesting article from HRMorning.com, by Tim Gould. It states that the effective date for new overtime rules could be pushed back from December 2017 to June 2017. This is significant for employers and employees alike, as they might be able to wait essentially another year for the law to pass. It will be beneficial for employers for the law to go into effect in June rather than December.
The efforts to push back the deadline for the new OT rules gained some more momentum this week, as Congress moved to enact a new law to extend the effective date to early next summer.
The House of Representatives passed the Regulatory Relief for Small Businesses, Schools and Nonprofits Act (H.R. 6094) on Sept. 27. The law would move the effective date of the new OT rules from Dec. 1 to June 1, 2017.
A similar measure was introduced in the Senate by Sen. James Lankford (R-OK).
Lankford and Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI), lead sponsor of the House bill, are hoping the legislation will encourage the administration to delay the rule on its own, according to TheHill.com.
The legislative moves come on the heels of two lawsuits filed earlier in the week.
Twenty-one states joined in a federal lawsuit that charges the Obama administration with overstepping its authority in rewriting the rules, which raise the overtime salary threshold from $23, 600 to $47,500 per year. The suit claims the change will place an undue burden on state budgets.
Just hours after the states’ suit was filed, a similar suit was filed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups. Both lawsuits were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
There’s no telling what might happen in the two Texas cases, but it’s highly unlikely the Congressional proposal will pass. President Obama has promised to veto the legislation.
See the original article Here.
Source:
Gould, T. (2016 September 30) Congress moves to push back effective date of new OT rules. [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address https://www.hrmorning.com/congress-moves-to-push-back-effective-date-of-new-ot-rules/
Number Of Uninsured Falls Again In 2015
Interesting article from Kaiser Health News about decreasing uninsured rates by Julie Rovner
The federal health overhaul may still be experiencing implementation problems. But new federal data show it is achieving its main goal — to increase the number of Americans with health insurance coverage.
According to the annual report on health insurance coverage from the Census Bureau, the uninsured rate dropped to 9.1 percent, down from 10.4 percent in 2014. The number of Americans without insurance also dropped, to 29 million from 33 million the year before.
The Census numbers are considered the gold standard for tracking who has insurance and who does not, because its survey samples are so large. It does change methodology from time to time, however (most recently in 2013), so years-long comparisons are not necessarily accurate.
Still, between 2013 and 2015, the first two full years the health law was in effect, the uninsured rate dropped by more than 4 percentage points. The total number of uninsured fell by 12.8 million. Meanwhile, the percentage of Americans with insurance for at least some part of the year climbed to 90.9 percent, by far the highest in recent memory.
“I don’t remember it ever being in the 90s before,” said Paul Fronstin of the Employee Benefit Research Institute, who has been tracking insurance statistics since the early 1990s.
The Obama administration was quick to take credit for the insurance improvements. “The cumulative coverage gains since 2013 have put the uninsured rate at its lowest level ever,” said members of the White House Council of Economic Advisers in a statement.
The 2015 report shows insurance gains across all income levels, ages and types of employment, although some groups did better than others. Young adults — specifically 26-year-olds — remain the most likely to lack coverage. Although the Affordable Care Act guaranteed that young adults could stay on their parents’ plans longer than in the past, that protection ends when they turn 26.
Among states, those that took the health law’s option to expand the Medicaid program for the poor saw greater gains in coverage than those that did not. “The overall decrease in the uninsured rate of 2.4 percentage points in expansion states, compared with 2.1 percentage points in no-expansion states,” said the report. The state with the highest percentage of uninsured residents remained Texas at 17.1 percent; the state with the fewest uninsured remained Massachusetts with an uninsurance rate of 2.8 percent.
The single largest source of health insurance remains plans provided by employers. An estimated 177.5 million Americans had employment-based coverage in 2015, which was up more than 3 million from 2013.
See the original article Here.
Source:
Rovner, J. (2016 September 13). Number of uninsured falls again in 2015. [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address https://khn.org/news/number-of-uninsured-falls-again-in-2015/
How to Hire Accountable People
Here's a good read from The Society for Human Resource Management by Bruce Weinstein
Accountable employees keep their promises, consider the consequences of their actions, take responsibility for their mistakes, and make amends for those mistakes.
The following questions may help you discern a job candidate’s level of accountability.
Describe a situation in which you took responsibility for a mistake you made. What were the consequences to you for doing so?
Brad, a mailroom worker at a large pharmaceutical company, threatened a coworker. He initially denied what he had done but eventually admitted it and added that he hadn’t intended to follow through with the threat. Geri was the HR director at the company. She believed in Brad and rebuffed efforts to have him fired.
Brad agreed to take an anger management course and went on to become Employee of the Month. In Geri’s telling of the story, Brad’s hardscrabble background made owning up to his mistake especially challenging. But he did it, and that’s why Brad is one of the Good Ones—high-character employees who consistently deliver superior results.
For doing right by an employee, Geri is a Good One too!
Have you ever taken responsibility for a mistake that a member of your team made?
One of the people I interviewed forThe Good Ones: Ten Crucial Qualities of High-Character Employees, told me that his boss Harvey took the heat for a mistake that a direct report had made that cost the company a lot of money and aggravation. The magnitude of the problem was so severe that Harvey submitted his resignation to his own boss, Suresh, but Suresh wouldn’t accept it. In fact, he promoted Harvey for doing something that not enough managers do: accept responsibility for something that occurred on their watch.
Walk me through a typical working day.
Asking a job applicant to provide details of a working day is an attempt to discover the person’s work/life balance. The point is to get the applicant’s assessment of how work fits in with his or her life. People with a strong work ethic are accountable people, because they keep their promises to their employers to do their jobs well. They’re neither lazy people nor workaholics.
“But this question is too personal to ask, even if it’s legal to do so,” one might object. Yes, it’s personal, but in an entirely appropriate way. The interviewer is trying to get a fuller sense of the person before him or her. What role does work play in the job candidate’s life? How much does he or she value having a rich and varied personal life? Asking about the candidate’s sex life or religious views are out of bounds; inquiring about work/life balance is not.
This is the second in a series of blog posts on how to hire high-character people. The first one was How to Hire Honest People. Next time, we’ll look at what it means to be a caring person and how to evaluate this quality in job applicants.
See the original article Here.
Source:
Weinstein, B. (2016 September 23). How to hire accountable people. [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address https://blog.shrm.org/blog/how-to-hire-accountable-people
Employee Recognition: Picking Up the Pieces
Here's an interesting article from The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) by David Kovacovich
As I enter my tenth year in the Human Capital Management space, I figured it would be beneficial to my readers to reflect on how our industry has (and has not) evolved over the last decade's time.
* The following scenarios are built on real life business engagements. The names have been changed to protect the innocent.
Case Study #1: A Story of Manipulation
Employee A (Let's call him Carl) had worked for Company X (let's call it Pied Piper) for a calendar year. After 3 failed endeavors at Bay Area start ups, Carl was looking for something more stable. He had a single motivating factor: MONEY!
Work at a Large Corporate Technology firm was different than the start-up world: Bureaucracy was thick, rule structure was more intense and cashing out was trumped by climbing the ladder. So how could he climb the ladder?
Achieving sales results did not come as easily in an Enterprise role at a large company and Carl struggled in this first year. The results weren't there so he needed another tool to help get him promoted. Then it hit him like a lightening bolt..... his company had announced the end of the annual performance review process to be replaced with a high touch performance management system (even large corporations cannot refute common sense). The performance management process was positioned as a pro-active measure to build the internal talent pool.
Carl's bargaining chip? Employee Recognition would be leveraged as part of the Performance Management system. Carl's job was simple, he sent an email to roughly 100 colleagues asking them to participate in an experiment (he even went-so-far as to title his email "An Experiment In Human Compassion"). Carl asked each of his colleagues to send him a recognition through their peer to peer system. He offered to return the gesture. Carl was a fun guy at happy hour so getting his peers to buy-in was no problem. Within a week, Carl shot to the top of Recognition Leaderboard. This flagged him as an 'up and comer' in the system and garnered him an opportunity to apply for a Management position.
Carl was promoted to Management, 8 employees left under his reign and he was fired less than a year later.
The company lost great performers and the recognition program was tarnished.
What's worse? The company was sued by an employee who was passed over for promotion sighting leadership development as a popularity contest. (Carl's "Human Compassion" email was submitted into evidence).
Lesson Learned: Using Recognition as a Performance Lever is Dangerous Business!
Case Study #2: A Shattered Cookie Cutter
The message was simple, "we need to cut costs so any programs that are not mission-critical are to be discontinued". The CEO was very clear in her directives so the formal recognition program was removed. This program had operated with over 90% adoption for nearly 10 years (CRM adoption hovered at about 38%).
With the program removed a caveat was dangled. Keeping our employees engaged is job one so we are reconstructing programs that will streamline appreciation:
1. Employees would go to dinner with their supervisor if they qualified as a top quarterly achiever.
2. Employees who hit a tenure milestone would receive a letter from the CEO and a gift card.
When Employee A (let's call her Nancy) hit her 20 year anniversary with the company, she received a form letter from the CEO and a $250 gift card. She tested the signature on the letter but it did not smudge. Then she pulled out her i-phone to use the calculator.
$1.73 a month. That's what her contribution to the organization was worth.
She flipped over the form letter, wrote two words on the back, grabbed a picture of her kids from her desk and headed out the door.....
I QUIT
Lesson Learned: No Recognition is Better than Thoughtless Recognition!
Case Study #3: Leadership Jumps on the Manipulation Train
The VP of HR sent out the annual employee survey at the tail end of the 7 paragraph diatribe. The message offered a proverbial laundry list of all of the "perks and benefits" of working at Company X. Benefits packages, non-guaranteed pay increases, company functions and education aid were all mentioned as the things that made Company X a "Great Place to Work". Mr. HR Guy included a mention of half day Fridays during the summer months if the company hit their revenue goal.
Filling out the survey was mandatory. Managers received bonuses for "5" rating across the board and were regulated for examination if any of their team dipped below last year's survey results.
The survey structure was based on the following:
1. Make the Great Place to Work list and Senior Managers receive a bonus.
2. Managers who average a "5" receive a bonus.
3. Managers whose average scores wavered were consulted by HR as to what to do to ensure employees "no longer seemed discontent".
The leader of the Human Engagement process allowed his greed to override a prime opportunity to receive feedback from the trenches. He did not receive his bonus.
Managers were subjected to adversarial relationships with employees: meeting with each of them to guess who used what comment to berate them while urging employees to keep their comments in-house.
The results of the survey were skewed. Employees who wished to stay in their managers good graces "marked 5 to survive". Those who saw through the hypocrisy of the exercise gave lower scores than they otherwise would have to mock Leadership's misunderstanding of workforce engagement!
Lesson Learned: Surveys Are an Opportunity to Identify Areas of Improvement not a Meter for Compensation!
The Recognition industry was built by fulfillment houses whose strengths lie in purchasing & distribution. Times have caught up with them. It's 2016 and systems of feedback and leadership development are far more important to today's employee than a logo-ed lamp.
Surprises:
1. Companies are still investing heavy dollars in catalog-driven Service Anniversary programs (because employees still like them).
2. Performance Management has not replaced Employee Recognition.
3. Social Recognition has proven effective for a limited time if there is not a reward within the process of participating.
4. Results compensation programs are up to 100x more-invested than Recognition programs in the majority of companies.
Opportunity:
1. Diversify budgets to create more high touch, immediate recognition opportunity
- I've beat this horse to death since 2006 and I'm not giving up.
2. Make recognition initiatives performance based.
- It's incredibly simple to program technology to reward mission critical behaviors instead of off-the-shelf catch phrases.
3. Use Social Recognition to attract employees to a platform that offers a variety of performance-based programs.
- Consolidation enhances engagement and saves significant dollars.
4. Replace revenue improvement incentives with behavior-based development programs.
- Compensating the bottom line is easy to measure and easier to manipulate. Creating programs that promote responsible behavior geared toward relationship development will strengthen long-term organizational stability and improve revenue.
I believe the Human Capital Management industry (or whatever you want to call it) has the greatest opportunity for growth of any:
- Human Resource professionals need to continue a Change Management focus.
- Vendors should shift from reward fulfillment to active behavior change consulting.
Don't Forget to Remember!
Dave
See the original article Here.
Source:
Kovacovich, D. (2016 September 27). Employee recognition: picking up the pieces. [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address https://blog.shrm.org/blog/employee-recognition-picking-up-the-pieces
What You Need To Know About The EEOC’s Updated Guidelines For Retaliation
Interesting article on EEOC guideline updates from, Employee Benefit Adviser by Bobbi Kloss
Did you know that under the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, an employee who believes that they have been retaliated against by an employer for complaining against unlawful discrimination in the workplace can file a complaint with the EEOC under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), Title V of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act, the Equal Pay Act (EPA), and/or Title II of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act. It is worth noting, this is not an either or situation, meaning, an employee’s claim can cross over the various discrimination laws.
Employers with at least 15 employees — or 20 employees in age discrimination cases, including labor unions and employment agencies — are covered by EEOC laws. The EEOC is responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee because of the person's race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, gender identity, and sexual orientation), national origin, age (40 or older), disability, or genetic information. A very important point to keep in mind: it’s illegal to discriminate against a person because the person complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit.
The EEOC laws apply to all types of work-related actions, including hiring, firing, promotions, harassment, training, wages and benefits. To put it all in perspective — and show just how large and widespread this issue is — here are some sobering statistics: charges of retaliation filed with the EEOC accounted for 44.5% of alleged basis of discrimination in FY2015 with more than 39,700 allegations filed and with monetary benefits awarded in the amount of $173.5 million (not including those paid through litigation), according to an EEOC report on litigation statistics: Retaliation-Based Charges FY 1997 - FY 2015. Compare today’s numbers to 1997, when 18,198 allegations were filed and $41.7 million in benefits were awarded. Retaliation complaints continue to be the most frequent form of alleged discrimination filed with the EEOC since 2009.
Final enforcement guidance
It is no wonder then that at the end of August the EEOC issued its final enforcement guidance on retaliation and related issues replacing its 1998 Compliance manual section on retaliation. The update also provides guidance for the “interference” (prohibiting coercion, threats or other acts that interference with exercise of rights) provision under the ADA.
The various topics explained in the new guidance include:
- The scope of employee activity protected by the law;
- Legal analysis to be used to determine if evidence supports a claim of retaliation;
- Remedies available for retaliation;
- Rules against interference with the exercise of rights under the ADA;
- Detailed examples of employer actions that may constitute retaliation.
The EEOC also released The Small Business Fact Sheet: Retaliation and Related Issues and a set of FAQs, Questions and Answers: Enforcement Guidance on Retaliation and Related Issues for clarification on main topic points for employers.
As a trusted benefit adviser, why should you be concerned about this update in the EEOC Compliance Manual? This is another opportunity to be in front of your clients and help guide them with their employment practices. Good business practices help attract and retain employees during these competitive times. Creating a culture free from employment discrimination can also create a motivated, stress free workforce leading to reduced benefit claims, reduced absenteeism, and turnover, which can allow for business growth.
What can your employers do now to ensure that their organization is proactively compliant with EEOC laws?
1) Make sure the Employee Handbook contains their EEOC policy statement and includes a process for an employee to file allegations of a complaint of workplace discrimination.
2) Train employees and supervisors on lawful and unlawful employment practices, including retaliatory behavior.
3) Take all complaints of discrimination seriously and ensure that a prompt and thorough investigation is conducted.
Employers should also make sure that their performance management process is documented and non-discriminately administered. If an employer needs to take corrective performance action — up to and including termination of employment — against any employee who has filed a complaint of discrimination, it is advised that they seek guidance from their Employment Law attorney before taking any action.
Lastly, discrimination in the workplace can be avoided by having a culture that promotes diversity, making employment decisions based upon performance, and maintains professionalism in all forms of communication.
See the original article Here.
Source:
Kloss, B. (2016 September 22). What you need to know about the EEOC's updated guidelines for retaliation. [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address: https://www.employeebenefitadviser.com/opinion/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-eeocs-updated-guidelines-for-retaliation
2016 Draft Forms & Instructions Released: Affordable Care Act Reporting Update
Great feature from The National Law Review by Damian A. Myers,
Since our last ACA Reporting Update, the extended deadlines to distribute Forms 1095-B and 1095-C to covered individuals and employees and to file the forms with the IRS have passed. The IRS has stated, however, that late forms can still be submitted via electronic filing and the forms that received an error message should be corrected. By many accounts, the first ACA reporting season presented numerous challenges. From collecting large amounts of data to compiling the forms, to working with service providers that faced their own unique challenges, to facing form rejections and error notifications from an inadequate IRS electronic filing system, employers and coverage providers faced obstacles nearly every step of the way. Nevertheless, most employers and coverage providers were able to get the forms filed and put the 2015 ACA reporting season behind them.
But, alas, there is no rest for the weary. In late-July, the IRS released new draft 2016 Forms 1094-B and 1095-B (the “B-Series” Forms) and Forms 1094-C and 1095-C (the “C-Series” Forms). Additionally, on August 1, the IRS released draft instructions to the C-Series Forms (as of the date of this blog, draft instructions for the B-Series Forms have not been released). For the most part, the 2016 ACA reporting requirements are similar to the 2015 requirements, subject to various revisions described below.
-
Various changes have been made to the forms and instructions to reflect that certain forms of transition relief are no longer applicable. For example, the non-calendar year transition relief (for plan years starting in 2014) that applied in 2015 does not apply in 2016. Similarly, changes have been made to reflect that the “Section 4980H Transition Relief” is still relevant only for non-calendar year plans though the end of the plan year ending in 2016. The Section 4980H Transition Relief exempts applicable large employers (“ALEs”) with 50-99 full-time employees from penalties under Section 4980H of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”) and reduces the 95% threshold to 70% for other ALEs. The relief also exempts ALEs from having to offer coverage to dependents if certain requirements are met. For calendar year plans, the threshold is at 95% throughout 2016 and dependent coverage must be offered during each month of the year.
-
The draft instructions to the C-Series Forms provide more detail and examples on how ALEs should prepare the forms. Instead of referring to “employers” throughout the instructions, the IRS has replaced that term in most cases with “ALE Member.” The reason for this change is to highlight the fact that each separate ALE Member must file its own forms. Examples related to completing the authoritative Form 1094-C highlight that each separate entity (determined based on employer identification number) is required to file its own authoritative Form 1094-C.
-
As promised by the IRS last year, there are two new indicator codes for Line 14 of Form 1095-C. These new codes ask employers to indicate whether a conditional offer was made to a spouse. An offer of coverage to a spouse is conditional if it is subject to one or more reasonable, objective conditions. For example, if a spouse must certify that he or she is not eligible for group health coverage through his or her employer, or is not eligible for Medicare, in order to receive an offer of coverage, the offer is considered conditional.
-
The draft instructions to the C-Series Forms reflect that the good faith compliance standard applicable to 2015 forms (under which filers could avoid reporting penalties upon a showing of good faith) no longer applies for 2016 ACA reporting. Going forward, reporting penalties may be waived only upon the standard showing of reasonable cause.
-
The draft instructions to the C-Series Forms include new information related to coding for COBRA continuation coverage. There has been some uncertainty regarding how to treat offers of COBRA continuation coverage since the IRS removed relevant guidance from its Frequently Asked Questions website in February 2016. Similar to the 2015 instructions, the draft 2016 instructions provide that offers of COBRA coverage after termination from employment should be coded with 1H (Line 14) and 2A (Line 16) whether or not the COBRA coverage is elected. The new instructions now state that this coding sequence also applies for other, non-COBRA post-employment coverage, such as retiree coverage, when the former employee was a full-time employee for at least one month of the year.
In the case of an offer of COBRA coverage following a reduction in hours, the basic coding requirement is the same as in 2015 – the offer of COBRA coverage is treated as an offer of coverage on Line 14 of the Form 1095-C. The draft instructions expand on this basic requirement to explain how to code Lines 14 and 16 when the offer of COBRA coverage is not made to a spouse or dependent. In general, for purposes of Code Section 4980H, an offer of coverage made once per year to an employee and his or her spouse and dependents is treated as an offer for each month of the year even if the coverage is declined for the employee, spouse, and/or dependents. Under general COBRA rules, only those individuals enrolled in coverage immediately prior to the qualifying event receive an offer of COBRA coverage.
So how does this play out when an employee with a spouse and dependents elects self-only coverage during open enrollment and later loses that coverage due to a reduction in hours? The draft instructions treat the initial offer of coverage at open enrollment and the offer of COBRA coverage as two separate offers of coverage. To determine the proper coding, the employer must look at who had the opportunity to enroll at each offer. During open enrollment, the employee, spouse and dependent had the opportunity to enroll. Thus, until the reduction in hours and loss of coverage, the coding should be 1E (offer to employee, spouse and dependent) in Line 14 and 2C (enrolled in coverage) in Line 15.
In contrast, the offer of COBRA coverage was only available to the employee and, therefore, after the reduction in hours, the coding should be 1B (offer to employee only) in Line 14. If the employee does not elect the COBRA coverage, code 2B (part-time employee) could be inserted in Line 16. If, however, the employee does elect COBRA coverage, it appears that code 2C (enrolled in coverage) should still be inserted in Line 16. Although this latter coding sequence is likely intended to protect the spouse and dependents from being “firewalled” from a premium credit, there appears to be nothing to indicate that the employer should not be assessed a penalty for failing to make an offer to the employee’s dependents.
-
The draft instructions for the C-Series Forms provide additional insight into how to calculate the number of full-time employees for purposes of column (b) in Part III of the Form 1094-C. The draft instructions clarify that the determination of full-time employee status is based on rules under Code Section 4980H and related regulations and not on other criteria established by an employer. Note that, currently, the draft instructions state that the monthly measurement period must be used for this purpose, but it appears that this is a mistake and that it should reference both the monthly measurement and look-back measurement methods. The IRS may clarify this in the final instructions.
-
One important non-change in the draft instructions is that the specialized coding for employees subject to the multiemployer plan interim guidance remains in effect for 2016 reporting. The interim guidance provides that an employee is treated as having received an offer of coverage if his or her employer is obligated pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement to contribute to a multiemployer plan on the employee’s behalf, provided that the multiemployer plan coverage is affordable and has minimum value and the plan offers dependent coverage to the eligible employee. The coding for such as employee is 1H (no offer of coverage) for Line 14 and 2E (multiemployer plan interim guidance) for Line 16.
There will undoubtedly be tweaks to the draft instructions to the C-Series forms, but significant changes appear unlikely. Given that only five months remain in 2016, employers should start planning now for 2016 ACA reporting based on the draft instructions and make alterations as necessary when final instructions and other guidance is released.
See the original article Here.
Source:
Myers, D. A. (2016 August 4). 2016 draft forms & instructions released: affordable care act reporting update. [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address https://www.natlawreview.com/article/2016-draft-forms-instructions-released-affordable-care-act-reporting-update
Small businesses wait for verdict on 2017 health care costs
Here's an informative article on healthcare costs, from San Francisco Chronicle (SFGate) by AP Business Writer Joyce M. Rosenberg
NEW YORK (AP) — Autumn is an anxious time for many small and medium-sized business owners as they wait to learn whether their health insurance costs will go up for 2017 — and if so, by how much?
"There's always a lump in your throat because you don't know what you're going to get," says Darren Ambler, a managing director at Insight Performance, a Dedham, Massachusetts-based human resources provider.
Whether a business sees a minuscule rise, a double-digit percentage increase or even a decline depends on factors including the state where the company is located and how much its insurance carrier paid in claims over the past year. If the average age of a company's employees rose or fell significantly — quite possible in a business with 10 or fewer employees — that could also affect the outcome.
Most of the increase in insurers' costs is a result of rising prescription drug prices, Ambler says.
While companies with 50 or more workers are required to offer affordable insurance to them and their dependents, many smaller businesses also do so because they believe it's right or they want to attract and retain good employees. When their carriers hike the premiums, companies have to decide whether to absorb the costs, scale back their coverage or find other alternatives.
Several medium-sized clients of The Megro Benefits Co., a consulting company, are facing 38 percent increases in their 2017 premium costs. Surges like that have owners thinking about what's called self-funding, says Cheryl Kiley, an adviser at Conshohocken, Pennsylvania-based Megro.
In self-funding, a business pays for all or part of employees' medical costs and hires an insurance company to administer its health plan. Companies typically purchase special policies to reimburse them in the event of employees' or dependents' catastrophic illnesses. Insurance companies charge less to administer self-funded plans because they don't have any risk, and employers also save because self-funded plans aren't subject to a 6.5 percent federal tax on premiums.
Although companies may be forced to find alternatives, Megro isn't seeing clients dropping insurance, president Bob Violasays.
"People won't come to work for them unless they have health insurance," he says.
RizePoint, which makes software for the food, lodging and retail industries and has about 75 employees, is paying 16 percent more for premiums on a policy that renewed Sept. 1. It's already considering self-funding for next year.
"It's a little bit risky," says Peter Johnson, a vice president at the Salt Lake City-based company. "But I don't want to see another 16 percent increase — it's nowhere near sustainable."
Johnson had budgeted for a rise of 12 percent. When RizePoint's carrier said premiums were going up more than that, Johnson searched unsuccessfully for a cheaper policy.
Rocky Finseth had the opposite experience. His premiums fell 11 percent although the policy was virtually unchanged from a year ago.
"I was surprised not only about the drop, but how large of a drop," says Finseth, owner of Carrara Nevada, a Las Vegas-based company that does lobbying on state and local issues in Nevada. His policy, which covers seven staffers, renews Oct. 1.
Finseth didn't question why his premiums dropped. He decided to use the savings to add vision coverage for his employees.
Some companies find that their policies have been discontinued.
"The plan we had was mysteriously canceled, and we were slotted into what we were told was the same plan, but when you looked at it, it was a worse plan," says Joseph Nagle, marketing director at EverCharge, a maker of electric vehicle charging stations. Among other things, the new plan had a higher deductible — $6,000 versus $5,000.
EverCharge, based in Emeryville, California, began researching other carriers and plans, chose three and asked its seven employees which they preferred. The company, which previously paid for all its staffers' insurance, gave them an option of continuing to have fully funded coverage, paying about $10 per month for better coverage, or $120 for another. They chose the middle option, and EverCharge was able to keep its health care costs unchanged, Nagle says.
Jason Anderson, owner of Datagame, a Kansas City, Missouri-based maker of software for online market research, hasn't received his renewal package yet. Anderson pays 100 percent of his three staffers' premiums, and 50 percent of their dependents' premiums.
He had a 5 percent increase for his 2016 premiums, an amount he doesn't see as significant. He says he can handle a 10 percent increase, but if he's facing a 20 percent hike, he might have to cut back on coverage for dependents.
"I keep waiting for the shoe to drop," says Anderson, who acknowledges that he'd be angry at an increase in the 20 percent range. "I don't see 10, 20, 30 percent improvements in what I am able to charge my clients," he says.
See the original article Here.
Source:
Rosenberg, J. M. (2016 September 14). Samll businesses wait for verdict on 2017 health care costs. [Web blog post]. Retrieved from address https://www.sfgate.com/news/us/article/Small-businesses-wait-for-verdict-on-2017-health-9222107.php