Employees branded with scarlet bracelets!

Every once in a while I find an incredibly shocking story online that I just have to talk about. A few weeks ago it was the BirthOrNot website, today it's toilet codes in the workplace. Men, bear with me. As I get into this, it may seem like this is a female-only issue, but it's not.

As reported by the Associated Newspapers website in Europe, MailOnline, a study conducted by a workers' union came back with the finding that many businesses are concerned with decreased productivity due to excessive bathroom usage. The study went on to reveal that some businesses instituted keycards and sign-in sheets to monitor the frequency of employee trips to the restroom. However, the most shocking part is the red bracelet. You've heard of the Scarlet Letter? Well, this is just as horrifying.

Women at a business in Norway were told to wear a red bracelet when they started their periods. Therefore, explaining their excessive visits to the restroom. Can you imagine? As a woman, I'd find it horrifying to announce such an intimate part of my life to all my co-workers. If I were a man, I'd feel insanely uncomfortable in a staff meeting with many of my colleagues branded in red. Talk about awkward! Not to mention that no woman would be taken seriously during her red bracelet days. Her decisions being questioned or her actions being dismissed due to her "condition".

The bracelet matter is currently under review by the Norwegian government, but I find it incredible that this happened in the first place.

Today's free business tip: Don't demean your employees. That is what decreases productivity; not trips to the bathroom.

* Hat tip to Marion Swan as I saw this story in her Twitter stream.

America: Land of the free, home of the poor

It wasn't my intention to write about unemployment again, but my last post on displaced workers seemed to really hit a nerve with people. Now, the Senate has decided to suspend benefits for millions of unemployed Americans. Many lost their benefits today, with no warning. Another two million will lose their unemployment compensation by July 10.

I don't want to turn this into a political discussion, because it's really a humanitarian issue. How can any evolved government yank money away from its citizens with less than 24 hours notice? How can government officials that "we the people" have elected decide that they will take food from people's mouths? How can they go to bed at night knowing that millions of Americans might lose their homes because what little money they counted on will now be gone? Granted, not everyone loses their benefits today, but here in California 200,000 people did (and millions more will within the next two weeks). It's the equivalent of being fired. One minute you're hanging on, the next minute the already frayed rope is yanked away.

This isn't an issue of Republican versus Democrat; it shouldn't be political at all. It's about getting America out of this recession. How can people who now have no income whatsoever stimulate the economy? They can't. How can new businesses move into vacant storefronts? They can't. How can the local department store add more positions and hire additional sales associates if people aren't coming in to buy things? They can't.

It's cyclical. And, that's why the discrimination against unemployed applicants that I wrote about last week made me so mad. If someone with a job simply moves to another job, while the unemployed applicant remains unemployed, how does that help the economy? It doesn't. 

What's the answer? Well, I can tell you that a bunch of out-of-touch, well-to-do geezers deciding that they won't help the American people when they need it most is not the solution. It's not right for our citizens and it's not right for our economy.

What can you do? Keep your ears open for your friends and former colleagues who are job hunting. Offer to introduce them to a hiring manager if it's within your ability. If you're filling a job vacancy, give that equally-qualified, unemployed applicant an interview.

Think all this unemployment stuff doesn't affect you? Well, let's talk when you've lost your job because all the unemployed people have no more money to put into the economy...

Don't apply for this position if you need a job

Today I read an article about how employers don't want to hire laid off workers. Apparently, some are even putting this is their job ads. Language such as "unemployed candidates will not be considered" or "must be currently employed" are being used in listings and the consensus seems to be that if you were laid off, you must have been let go for performance issues. I won't mix words here, this is just downright wrong and it makes me angry.

As someone who has worked in internal communications for some well-known companies, I have been privy to many privileged conversations pertaining to RIFs (i.e. layoffs). I know how and why decisions are made (frankly, more than I'd like to know). Although there may be a rare instance here and there where it's an opportunity to get rid of an under-performer, the primary reason for someone being let go is financial.

The person's salary is either disproportionately high by today's standards, the company is hemorrhaging money and has to start cutting people to remain solvent, management has found a cheaper way to do a job via outsourcing, the employee isn't in a revenue-generating position (e.g. sales, development, etc.), or some wise guy on the leadership team thinks he can save money by letting go an experience professional and having a junior employee take on the duties (with no change in quality, of course).

The career path I've chosen usually puts me in the last two categories and, unfortunately, I have been part of two massive layoffs in my life. Not because I was some deadbeat slacker who drooled and shopped on eBay all day, but because I cost money--money the company no longer had. And, unfortunately and erroneously, people think that anyone can write so why not lay off the gal who writes on behalf of the company?

I am shocked and dismayed that while our country is in the biggest recession and financial crisis since the Great Depression, that employers would discriminate against displaced workers. As for myself, I can say that both times I was laid off, I used the time to enhance my professional skills. I attended seminars and webinars, I read countless books to learn new skills and stay current, I actively networked to grow my list of professional contacts, I maintained my writing, and I seized every opportunity to improve myself. You know, that stuff you're too busy to do when you're working 60 hours a week. And, you know what? I knew more than my happily-employed peers did and found myself frequently teaching them new things. 

Unemployed candidates will not be considered? That kind of thinking is misinformed, short-sighted, flawed, and downright un-American. Shame on any company that embraces this kind of unwarranted discrimination, especially in this economy. 

Who's with me? Let's hear it!