By Belinda Weber, SPHR, GMA SHRM President
Many thoughts have been racing through my head as we approach the end of GMA SHRM’s fiscal year and we prepare to transition to the 2006-2007 Leadership Team. I have lots of reflections, on both a professional and personal note, that I thought might be an appropriate final “Message from the President”. Here are just a few…..
- It has been a year of great achievements which have delivered on the mission, vision, and values of the Chapter.
- We have introduced new programs and services that have enhanced the value proposition for membership.
- The chapter volunteers have established new and innovative ways to contribute to the profession, to serve to the professional, and to positively impact the communities served.
- The volunteering spirit of this chapter’s 80+ volunteers is awe-inspiring. They are enthusiastic, resourceful, and persistent in achieving their goals.
- And the Board of Directors are a committed team of leaders that are thoughtful in their decisions and are resoundingly dedicated to making a difference.
My closing thoughts are those of a more personal nature. It has been an honor to serve as the Chapter’s President. I have had the opportunity to work with a great group of people and have made many new friends in the process. I have appreciated the support and dedication of the members that are the heart and soul of this organization.
Thank you for allowing me to serve……
President, GMA SHRM
Top Managers are “Undefendable” - Your Harassment Policy is Not Enough
By Bob Gregg, Boardman Law Firm
Most organizations understand that a good anti-harassment policy is the defense against “hostile environment” suits. Unfortunately, the courts have ruled that the “Faragher/Ellerth defense” to sexual harassment cases is NOT available to executive managers. CEOs, board members, stockholders, and even vice-presidents of HR are company’s “alter ego.” Their improper acts can bind the liability, and there is NO defense which can be asserted in court. Most companies are unaware of this part of law. Top managers may be “undefendable” and create strict liability.
The Standard Defense
In 1998 the U.S. Supreme Court decided two “companion” cases regarding harassment under the Equal Employment Opportunity laws, Faragher v. City of Boca Raton and Burlington Industries v. Ellerth.
In what has become known as the “Faragher/Ellerth defense” the Supreme Court set forth standards for an employer to make a viable defense of a harassment case:
to defeat the charges the employer must show that it “exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct promptly any sexually harassing behavior, and . . . that the plaintiff employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer or to avoid harm otherwise.” Faragher v. Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775, (1998); Burlington Industries v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. at 765 (1998).
Based upon this language all knowledgeable employers have implemented Anti-Harassment and Respectful Workplace Policies. In addition, they have implemented other proactive practices such as anti-harassment training, and continuing education and vigilance.
However, that was not the whole quotation
The Supreme Court also stated:
Vicarious liability automatically applies when the harassing supervisor is either: (1) “indisputably within that class of an employer organization’s officials who may treated as the organization’s proxy” Faragher, 524 U.S. at 789, 118 S.Ct. 2275, or (2) “when the supervisor’s harassment culminates in a tangible employment action, such as discharge, demotion, or undesirable reassignment.” Id. at 808, 118 S.Ct. 2275.
This limited the Faragher/Ellerth defense. There are two exceptions. The second in the quote is for “quid pro quo” harassment, in which there is a tangible employment action such as hiring, firing, or discipline. This creates automatic liability in which the victim may skip the employer’s harassment policy, go straight to the EEOC, and the company gets no “first chance” to know of and correct the issue prior to being liable.
The other exception is in the quote about direct, no defense liability is for “Hostile Environment,” harassment by those at the top of the organization. They are the organization. They have so much control that they are deemed to be the “alter ego” of the organization and their acts are a “proxy” for the organization’s acts.
In Acked v. National Communications, 339 F.3d 376, 383 (5th Cir. 2003), a federal circuit, citing Faragher, ruled:
“[A] corporation is vicariously liable for the harassment of its President ‘who was indisputably within that class of an employer organization’s officials who may be treated as the organization’s proxy’. Faragher at 789, 118 S.Ct. 2275. The Court further suggested that an owner, supervisor holding a ‘sufficiently high position in the management hierarchy, a proprietor, partner, or corporate officer may also be treated as the organization’s proxy. Citing Faragher at 789-790, 118 S.Ct. 2275; see also Johnson v. West, 18 F.3d 725, 730 (7th Cir. 2000).
Other cases which hold that no defense is available when harassment is committed by an employers’ proxy or alter-ego are Mallinson-Montague v. Pocrnick, 224 F.3d 1224 (10th Cir. 2000) (where offender was Senior Vice President) and EEOC v. Reeves, 2003 WL 22999369 (C.C. Cal.) (offender was founder and CEO). 1
Adding Insult To Injury - Extra Punitive Damages
In addition to no defense-automatic liability, owners, Senior Executives and Board members can generate extra punitive damages due to their own lack of attention or uninvolvement in the anti-harassment process. An all too frequent phenomenon is that executives excuse themselves from anti-harassment and other employment relations training. Everyone else is required to go, but those at the top are “just too busy” to attend. This lack of attention looks “arrogant” to a jury.
The courts have found that inattention to training is an “extraordinary mistake” and “amounts to reckless indefense” which justifies substantial extra punitive damages. Anders v. GDC Inc. (4th Cir., 2002); Miller v. Kenworth of Dothan (11th Cir. 2002); Griffin v. City of Opa-Locka, et al. (11th Cir. 2001).
So, the very individuals who have the most at risk for their actions, tend to be the least informed and the least involved in the anti-harassment process. This guarantees larger punitive awards in addition to the automatic liability.
Executives should also be aware of the potential for personal liability in some sorts of harassment cases. [For instance, 42 U.S. Code §1981 allows suit of individuals for racial or ethnic discrimination, and tort actions may be added, as well.] It is not just a matter of the corporate coffers; the individual’s own bank account can suffer the hit as well. If the executive is undefendable this can be a major personal problem.
What Can Be Done To Diminish The Liability ?
The “alter ego” liability cannot be eliminated. If a person in a “proxy” position engages in hostile environment harassment the automatic liability will attach. However, an organization can seek to diminish the chances of the liability.
Training and Involvement
Those at the top of the organization should not skip training. Instead, they should be the primary examples of pro-active behavior, attending training, and encouraging all others to do so.
Executives, facility managers, and board members should be given information, such as this article, regarding their special status as an “undefendable alter ego” at the time they come into a potentially “proxyposition.”
Special emphasis should be given to humor. “Teasing” or “off the cuff” comments take on a heightened significance when done by someone at the top. The little incidents of racial, ethic, religious, humor or the small sexual innuendoes of an executive can become evidence in court, and can generate big legal expense and liability. Those in “proxy position” might read It Was Just A Joke (Boardman Law Firm) or other articles which illustrate the liability effects of what is uttered by executives.
Diminish the Alter Ego Status
In small organizations this may be impossible. The owner is the authority and there is little that can be done to balance or diffuse that fact.
In larger organizations the division of authority can help protect executives and board members.
Off-Site Complaint Alternative . One does not have to be an officer of the company to be in a “proxy position.” The general manager of a stand alone facility may in practicality have almost all personnel authority over that operation and be deemed an “alter ego” for that location.
To diminish this status the organization’s anti-harassment and other complaint policies should name both an on-site and a headquarter level off-site person to whom employees can raise concerns about harassment. Having only an on-site complaint process means the general managers at the top could block any investigations about themselves. The off-site alternative provides a way around the general manager and shows that higher levels of the organization are still “in charge,” thus diminishing the chances for “alter ego liability.”
Human Resources Final Approval for Tangible Employment Actions . Another way to diminish automatic, indefensible liability is by assuring that human resources has the final approval authority over all tangible employment decisions (hiring, firing, discipline, promotion, pay adjustments, transfers). This means that an executive or officer does not have absolute control, and employees who believe they are being harassed can raise concerns to HR before a tangible decision becomes effective.
The human resources final authority helps limited the “alter ego” status of the officers and executives regarding personnel matters. It helps prevent quid pro quo harassment through both a formal review of the validity of a decision and a complaint process to catch problems before they become indefensible.
This final approval practice will not change the liability once a tangible employment decision has been implemented. It will not change the “alter ego” status of an officer or top executive who bullies or bamboozles human resources into approving a problematic action. The final approval can, if effectively used, be an important safeguard to diminish the chances of that liability.
Special Attention for Board Members
Boards of Directors often include members who are not employees. They do not receive the company policies, do not attend training, do not get orientation regarding the rules of conduct. Yet they can wield very great authority, especially if they are major stockholders, or family members of the owners. They are also frequently present in the company’s offices.
Even though the board members do not sign the employment documents, they can exercise influence. In some instances the key board members are seen as “all powerful” and their every action takes on significance. In the case of Russell v. McKinny Hospital Venture (5th Cir. 2000), the extraordinary influence of a shareholder/family member in a family corporation influenced the decisions of executives and created liability.
Board members need special attention to assure that they understand their ability to generate liability, and at least a rudimentary understanding of the employment discrimination laws. Board members who do not have this understanding can unwittingly create indefensible liability, often thinking that they are “just joking” or bantering. Since they are in such important positions, no one is going to tell them that they are offending, until the trap door is sprung with the filing of the undefendable case.
Information for the board members is in their best interest, and is essential for the protection of the organization.
The standard Faragher/Ellerth defense for harassment cases is not available for acts committed by those at the top. They are undefendable and the organization is undefendable if the acts constitute discriminatory harassment.
Organizations can limit this liability through education; final HR review of employment decisions; and off-site alternative methods for complaints. The only way to really stop this indefensible liability is for those at the top, the organization alter egos, to be aware, understand the laws, and assure that their own behaviors are models of non-discrimination and a respectful workplace.
Bob Gregg, a partner at the Boardman Law Firm in Madison, Wisconsin, has been professionally involved in Employment Relations and Civil Rights work for more than 30 years. He has designed the workplace policies and procedures of numerous employers. He litigates and serves as an expert witness in employment cases. A recognized educator and trainer, Bob has conducted over 2,000 seminars throughout the United States and authored numerous articles on practical employment issues.
Copyright © 2005 by Robert E. Gregg. All rights reserved.
1 State laws can expand the undefendability to even lower levels. Some state’s anti-harassment laws make employers strictly liable for harassment by low level managers, including line supervisors and lead workers. For example, decisions under the Wisconsin Fair Employment Act have firmly stated that the WFEA is not Title VII. It has different language, and the federal defenses do not apply. The employer is liable “whether or not it addressed the matter and without regard to whether the complainant availed herself of opportunities to complain. There is no affirmative defense available to the employer where sexual harassment is perpetrated by its agent.” Sanderson v. Handi Gadgets Corp., ERD Case No. CR200201194 and 89 ( Wis. Labor Ind. Rev. Comm., 2005); Jim Walter Color Separations v. LIRC and Tobias, 226 Wis.2d 334, 595 N.W. 2d 68 (Wis. Ct. App., 1999).
The Next Step in HR Leadership
By Tom Gloudeman, Howick Associates
Want to be more strategic? Learn the business. On the surface, that may seem obvious. But more specifically, HR must understand how human capital influences the business. All strategies boil down to the right people doing the right things. Human capital IS the business – who gets things done, how things get done, and what things get done. With that perspective, human resources can either be an anchor or it can be the engine that drives the business.
Be Proactive Problem Solvers
Human resources professionals should think of themselves as proactive problem-solvers. Don’t wait for a CEO or senior leader to have a revelation about what HR can do. Gain all the knowledge you can in areas that are key drivers of the business. Show the leaders how you can help them. If you do that, you become an indispensable piece of the business’s overall strategy.
Early in my career at Lands’ End, I was in a training role and eventually moved into recruitment and organizational development. My experience in facilitating groups quickly gained recognition and I was asked to facilitate strategic planning programs throughout the company.
By doing this, I began to understand the levels of business and how all the pieces of the business model ultimately impacted the bottom line. It helped me look at the business problems in terms of ways we could leverage human capital. The more I knew about the business, the more able I was to identify ways to contribute.
Think about what skills your team has now and how you can add value to problems other organizational leaders are facing. For instance, many times marketing departments will hire outside contractors to run focus groups for them, but often times HR people have the facilitation skills to run the focus groups. So, you need to promote that facilitation skill to the marking directors.
Elevate the Entire HR Team
You can assess the skills of your team by gathering feedback from different parts of the business and the people HR supports. It’s not enough to just measure on standard HR metrics like cost per hire or time to fill a position. This doesn’t assess the impact they’re having within the organization.
HR teams need to change the way they think about their job and the overall business. An example is recruitment. The purpose of HR’s job is not to fill positions, but to support the business by making sure it has the people and the skill levels in place to achieve organizational goals. This shift in mindset lifts HR to a new level of thinking and increases their value to the organization.
Involve Senior Leadership
Another way to elevate the role of HR is by building stronger relationships with senior leaders, because the success of projects often hinges on their buy in and participation. Initiate contracts and partnership agreements that clearly establish roles and responsibilities. This is harder than it sounds. Not all business leaders want to be contracted with. Therefore, very specific skills should be taught to better prepare HR to contract effectively and build more collaborative relationships with leaders throughout the organization. Having these skills builds confidence for the HR team, and makes them more integrated, valuable contributors to the company.
Be Seamless with Business Goals
Howick Associates hosts deep dive conversations about strategic human resources and often we hear from HR practitioners that their goal is to have HR initiatives highlighted in the corporate strategy. But what the goal should really be is the recognition of human capital implications within the corporate strategy. If HR initiatives are called out separately from business initiatives, the cause is already lost. HR leaders need to understand that most, and be able to articulate their role to the rest of the company.
A comprehensive understanding of the business won’t happen overnight and there are no short cuts to becoming a more seamless, strategic entity. It’s a process that takes planning, time and leadership.
Tom Gloudeman is a consultant with Howick Associates. Tom was a keynote speaker at our May conference at the Monona Terrace and spoke on the topic of HR leadership.
Policy On Policies
By Bill Schrum, SPHR, University of Wisconsin Medical Foundation
Summer must be in the air - because in the last few weeks questions of dress codes, smoking and parking have taken the lead over more mundane questions like compensation and recruitment. In a spirit of spring, and adding a little humour and satire to the nature of the beast - I hope you get the point of the following epistle.
To begin, don't you hate it when someone begins with "I've been in this business for 25 years......"??? - I hate that too, so let me just say, I've been doing this since 1975.......... with numerous organizations and on numerous continents, and I'll tell you for a fact there is no such thing as the perfect policy. And, this is not just me, the research goes back hundreds of years.....
The British created a civil service policy in 1803 calling for a man to stand on the cliffs of Dover.
He was supposed to ring a bell if he saw Napoleon coming. The job was abolished in 1945. The bell's still there.
So, to those asking me directly about policies, my response is: Policies should be guidelines for organizational consistency and are too often crutches for managers. We do not all have to look, act, walk, talk and eat alike; but we do have to work within the parameters and cultural morés of our working environments. If we don't want to do that, we can leave and find another environment to play in.
Policies, by their nature, are usually written to address behaviors committed by few.... but bothersome to a few, vocal, others. The majority of people really don't much care until someone writes a "policy". Then it becomes an "issue" to be questioned as to interpretation. This little scenario then becomes the agar for other policies to grow from. Pretty soon - Bingo! - an entire policy manual. The far and away - vast - majority of the issues that we see everyday are not "policy" issues. They are, in fact, "management" issues. And, there is a difference. Policies don't make the company work right - managers and employees do.
Bottom-line on this : The management of the department is the responsibility of the Manager, not the HR department. We'll give managers advice, counsel, let them know what other's might be doing or saying - and we'll tell everyone all of the legal, moral, ethical and righteous things about what they're looking at. But, contrary to popular belief - we do not all have to look, act, and behave alike. And, "precedence" only means someone did something before. "Precedence" is often put forth as a legal fear factor, which it does well. However "precedence" is being redefined and debated and challenged in the court system every day. Our guiding principle is to do what is right.
Bottom-line on policies : Outside of procedural or legally required policies, the policy on policies is, if someone works here, odds are they're an adult and, as such, they're expected to look, act and work like one. We can have fun, we can be creative, we can have parties, we can dress "cool" and comfortable, we can work well, we can even balance our books and have a positive bottom-line - let's just be nice to each other and show a little respect to our fellow workers. If they need to know what that means, they should read the boldface above and if they still don't get it, they should ask their boss.
Bottom-line on dress codes : If you own a mirror, look in it before leaving home. People know they look better in neat, clean clothes - and we do too. The fact of the matter is that the way we look and act to the people we work with is the image of what those people think of us ........what other people think of our departments and ...........what people think of our organization. We want competence, communicativeness, concern, courage and creativity, but not week-old slept-in jeans or nose rings.
Bottom-line on smoking : I'm sorry if people pick on smokers, and I won't tell anyone that I quit cold-turkey from 3 packs a day. But if people want to smoke there are still places to do so. However, you've got to admit that smoking in a gang outside the building does look a little on the silly side, doesn't it? And smoking in the restroom? C'mon, high school's over. It's spring, if people want to smoke - go outside (clear the doorway), then fire up and go for a walk. The exercise will keep the rest of the body in better shape than the lungs. Sorry. I still smoke the occasional Macanudo, and if you're not nice I'll come and smoke one in your cube.
Lastly, as previously mentioned I've been doing this for awhile in a few places. The other thing I know for sure is that if you really want to upset people, and cause questions and concerns ......no matter the locale, the size, or the organization... just write a policy.
Or you can write a non-traditional policy memo……
Bill Schrum is the Vice President of Human Resources at the University of Wisconsin Medical Foundation.
Workforce Trends and Survey Results—How Does Your Organization Compare?
By William Griepentrog, Ph.D., MRA
Recent survey results released by Walker Information, an Indianapolis-based consulting group, present some interesting trends that will pose significant challenges for employers in the near future. For example:
- 31 percent of the employees surveyed plan to leave their current employer within the next two years.
- 28 percent would like to leave their current employer but feel they can’t.
- Only 34 percent are committed to their companies and plan to stay with their companies for at least the next two years.
- Only 40 percent believe that their companies treat them as their most important asset.
Some of MRA’s Employee Opinion Survey normative data may help shed light on why employees report that they are satisfied, or dissatisfied, with their employers. The norms represent the responses of thousands of white-collar and blue-collar employees in a variety of union and nonunion manufacturing and service businesses across the U.S.
- About 40 percent of employees surveyed believe their pay is not competitive to other employers in their area.
- About 30 percent believe their benefits package is not good compared to other organizations in their area.
- About 30 percent believe that management in their organization is not doing what it takes to make the organization successful, while 40 percent believe that management does not consider employee interests when making decisions.
- 30 percent of employees believe they do not get feedback that helps them do their jobs and 40 percent report that their supervisor does not deal effectively with poor performance.
- 30 percent do not believe that their organization makes them feel that their contributions are important and that they have opportunities to develop their skills The data presented above leads to the conclusion that there is considerable room for improvement and opportunity to change the work environment to maximize employee retention, particularly the retention of those employees you can least afford to lose—your committed, engaged employees.
A significant question is how do your employees (particularly those who are loyal/engaged) view the organization and the way they are managed? A good starting point is to conduct a well-constructed, confidential employee opinion survey. There are a number of consulting groups that now have surveys with an engagement component. MRA is offering its own Employee Opinion Survey/Engagement Index to specifically focus on how engaged employees view their organizations and their jobs. No matter whom you use, a survey can be an impetus for change and serve as a significant human resource metric as your organization moves to the future.
William Griepentrog is the Director of Organization Development at MRA-The Management Association, Inc.
Website of the Month: Criminal Background Checks
Criminal background checks are becoming fairly common in the recruitment process. The challenge is most states have different procedures to request and receive a criminal background check for a job candidate. Fortunately, the State of Wisconsin Department of Justice has assembled these procedures for each state on their website. Go to http://www.doj.state.wi.us/dles/cib/sclist.asp and click on the state where you need the background check. Each state listing can help you get started with helpful information such as website addresses for online searches and phone numbers in case you have questions. The information is based on survey information, and the department asks you to contact them by email if you become aware of any changes.
BOARD POSITION AVAILABLE
The GMA SHRM Board recently received news from Marj Pieper, VP of Membership Interaction, that she would be moving on to another career opportunity. While we are happy for Marj’s personal news, we are very sorry to see her leave her position on the Board. Marj has been a great leader both in her Board position and previously as the Membership Interaction Committee Chair. She has been a wonderful volunteer for several years and has worked to deliver quality New Member Orientations and develop networking and volunteer recognition programs for the Chapter. We appreciate all Marj has done for GMA SHRM. She will be sincerely missed.
This leaves the Board position of VP of Membership Interaction open. Any member who has an interest in applying for the position may send a letter of interest and a resume by June 9, 2006, to Sue Estes, President Elect, at email@example.com. If you have questions about the responsibilities of the position and the time commitment required, please take a look at the Board job description posted on www.gmashrm.org or contact Sue Estes at 238-3410.
GMA SHRM Receives Distinguished Award
The Society for Human Resource Management in Alexandria, VA has awarded the Superior Merit Chapter designation to the Greater Madison Area Society for Human Resource Management for its scope of work in perpetuating and supporting the mission of the organization in 2005.
GMA SHRM is one of 100 chapters receiving the distinction in SHRM’s North Central Region comprised of 10 states and 145 affiliated chapters.
“By achieving Superior Merit designation, your chapter has distinguished itself as an outstanding organization dedicated to serving the networking and professional development needs of your members and to the advancement of the human resources profession” noted Keith J. Greene, SPHR, Vice President, Member Relations for SHRM.
Our chapter receives a Certificate of Recognition, a specialized banner to display at its meetings and events, and is being recognized in SHRM’s publications and at its conferences.
Welcome New Members!
GMA SHRM welcomes the following members who joined our chapter in April.
Karen A. Bendler
Unity Health Insurance
Tara A. Cassady
Amy L. Gregg
The QTI Group
Nicole J. Knoernschild
Deborah L. Lee
Human Resources Director
Stoughton Trailers, LLC
Martha L. Lester-Mittenzwei
TIL Insurance Staffing Co.
Mark A. McCoy
Home Mortgage Consultant
Wells Fargo Home Mortgage
Denise C. Weidner
Human Resource Generalist
Lunch and Learn, International Professionals U.A., Noon to 1pm, JT Whitney’s, 674 S. Whitney Way. Get your hands dirty...the Enron Way: Ethical Business Dilemmas Around the World. Have you been presented with an ethical dilemma in business? Author and business ethics professor Dennis Collins, leads a discussion on the issues and dynamics of ethics in business around the world. Members Free, Non-Members $5. You can buy your own lunch at the table. RSVP to:firstname.lastname@example.org
Business Card Exchange, Greater Madison Chamber of Commerce, 4:30 to 6:30pm, The Madison Residential Apartment Community, 5440 Congress Avenue. Mark your calendars for the next Business Card Exchange at the luxurious Madison Residential Apartment Community on Thursday, June 15 from 4:30-6:30 p.m. Hang out by the pool and enjoy a June afternoon while networking with fellow GMCC members and making new contacts! There will be food, beverages, fun, and of course the famed Business Card Prize Draw. The UW-Madison is even giving away a football signed by Barry Alverez! There’s no need to RSVP- just show up with your business cards! Questions? Contact Sarah Breckenridge, Program and Event Coordinator at email@example.com or 443-1954.
Local Connections, Downtown Madison, Inc., 7:45 to 9:00am, Hausmann-Johnson Conference Center, 700 Regent Street, 2 nd Floor. These small and informal meetings will provide an opportunity to learn about business-related topics from a panel of experts and an open forum for discussion and sharing of ideas. This month’s topic is Emergency Contingency Planning with panelists from Hausmann-Johnson Insurance, MPI Protective, and the American Red Cross Badger Chapter. Event sponsored by Quarles & Brady LLP.
“Change Your Life in 45 Minutes…Guaranteed”, Business & Professional Women of Madison, 5:30 to 8:00pm, Double Tree Hotel, 525 W. Johnson St. Monthly dinner meeting with presentation by Neil Diffenbaugh of Life Conversions. For more information, visit http://www.madisonbpw.com/meetings.htm.
Have you started with a new company? Has your organization recently promoted you to a new position? Or do you want to recognize a new person or promotion within your department? If so, we want to hear about it. Send us an e-mail, and we’ll publish your good news in the next HR InTouch!
HR InTouch Guidelines
Do you have an interest in writing for the HR InTouch? We have an interest in learning more about your area of expertise!
Why should you volunteer? Top three reasons: 1) to share your knowledge and experiences to educate others; 2) to become more connected in the HR and Dane County communities; and 3) to contribute towards the advancement of GMA SHRM and the HR profession.
The first step is for you to choose a submission option: you can pre-submit an article to GMA SHRM at any time for us to use in any of the upcoming newsletters, you can sign up to write for a particular month, or we can put you on a list of people to contact in future months whenever we need articles.
Because the HR InTouch is now in an online format, the size is flexible. The article should be engaging and hold readers’ attention. Include the core information in your article, and we will advise if it is too lengthy.
GMA SHRM is conscious not to allow solicitation through the articles, in an effort to protect the interests of our partners and members. The nature of the article should be educational (i.e., what are the business advantages of having a product like yours) or informational. Otherwise, if you truly are interested in advertising through the HR InTouch, you can work with our Marketing Committee. As a rule of thumb for article writing, if the submission relates to a for-profit event, or specifically markets your company (vs. your industry), it is an advertisement, and should be purchased. If it is a not-for-profit event that your company is hosting, or an announcement (i.e., a SHRM member recently joined your company), it is an acceptable addition to the HR InTouch content. If you have any questions related to the appropriateness of your submission, please contact us.
If you have questions, or to submit an article, contact GMA SHRM at firstname.lastname@example.org .