Preventing Workplace Violence

Workplace violence is not something we generally talk about or want to think about.  However, while we can’t completely insulate our worksites and our employees from it, there are things we can do.  According to SACS Security in Akron, Ohio, here is a 6 step approach for preventing and responding to workplace violence:

1. SMART HIRING. Know what kind of person you are bringing into your organization.
2. SUBSTANCE ABUSE. Drugs and alcohol problems drastically increase your chances of all levels of workplace violence. Keep them out with policy, training and testing.
3. MANAGEMENT TRAINING. Managers cannot stop what they do not see. Train them to recognize the signs and be proactive.
4. POLICY. Have a dedicated workplace violence policy. It tells your employees management is serious about the subject and concerned for their security.
5. PHYSICAL SECURITY. Identify your risks and mitigate them with proper physical security measures.
6. DE-ESCALATING AGGRESSION. Managers and customer contact employees need to know how to properly deal with angry employees, clients or visitors.

An additional step to insulating your site & people:  don’t insulate yourself or others in ownership/management from what is happening in your workplace and, to the extent advisable, your employees’ lives.  Don’t snoop – just don’t close your eyes to what may be happening.  Intervene in a positive, caring, proactive way.  Not only may you help a valued member of your team, but you just might save lives.

Business owners, managers & thinking-about-its!

Do you want to capitalize on and learn from the mistakes of others?

Experts say you should:

What the experts say

• Discuss with a CPA the expected monthly expenses before starting a business.
• Establish a five-year business plan and update it frequently and regularly.
• Create a cash reserve equal to at least six to nine months of operating expenses.
• Research several website developers before building a website. Be realistic on the time and money it will take.
• Check monthly reports of overdue bills.
• Know your business cycle, and plan bigger bills to come due in months with healthy cash flows.
• Take a couple of hours each week to learn details on one customer and their business.
• Focus time on running the business rather than working in it.
• Understand the different types of business entities and how that will affect taxation and possible liabilities.
• Delegate.
• Learn the features of your financial software that could save time and money and help with planning.

From an article in The Record by Carol Lawrence

Do you have interns at your company?

The Chamber often has interns “on staff” and they are often of great benefit to our mission.  I’ve often encouraged members to work with the universities and colleges to give interns an opportunity to try their newly learned skills in the business world and encouraged students to use internships as a way to put those skills to use in the real world and also to build their resume.

It has come to our attention that there are rules for how interns must be handled relating to pay and college credit and we want to make sure businesses are aware of them.  Apparently, these aren’t new rules, just rules that periodically come up for review and I wouldn’t want one of our members to get fined for something they were unaware they were in violation of!!

The bottom line, as it has been explained to us, is if you have interns in your company who aren’t being compensated and they are NOT receiving college credit for the internship – make sure you have a written agreement between you and the intern clearly delineating  the arrangement and that all the tests below are met.

The “Fact Sheet” regarding internships:

Fact Sheet #71: Internship Programs Under The Fair Labor Standards Act

This fact sheet provides general information to help determine whether interns must be paid the minimum wage and overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act for the services that they provide to “for-profit” private sector employers.

Background

The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) defines the term “employ” very broadly as including to “suffer or permit to work.”  Covered and non-exempt individuals who are “suffered or permitted” to work must be compensated under the law for the services they perform for an employer.  Internships in the “for-profit” private sector will most often be viewed as employment, unless the test described below relating to trainees is met.  Interns in the “for-profit” private sector who qualify as employees rather than trainees typically must be paid at least the minimum wage and overtime compensation for hours worked over forty in a workweek

The Test For Unpaid Interns

There are some circumstances under which individuals who participate in “for-profit” private sector internships or training programs may do so without compensation.  The Supreme Court has held that the term “suffer or permit to work” cannot be interpreted so as to make a person whose work serves only his or her own interest an employee of another who provides aid or instruction.  This may apply to interns who receive training for their own educational benefit if the training meets certain criteria.  The determination of whether an internship or training program meets this exclusion depends upon all of the facts and circumstances of each such program.

The following six criteria must be applied when making this determination:

1. The internship, even though it includes actual operation of the facilities of the employer, is similar to training which would be given in an educational environment;
2. The internship experience is for the benefit of the intern;
3. The intern does not displace regular employees, but works under close supervision of existing staff;
4. The employer that provides the training derives no immediate advantage from the activities of the intern; and on occasion its operations may actually be impeded;
5. The intern is not necessarily entitled to a job at the conclusion of the internship; and
6. The employer and the intern understand that the intern is not entitled to wages for the time spent in the internship.

If all of the factors listed above are met, an employment relationship does not exist under the FLSA, and the Act’s minimum wage and overtime provisions do not apply to the intern.  This exclusion from the definition of employment is necessarily quite narrow because the FLSA’s definition of “employ” is very broad.  Some of the most commonly discussed factors for “for-profit” private sector internship programs are considered below.

Similar To An Education Environment And The Primary Beneficiary Of The Activity

In general, the more an internship program is structured around a classroom or academic experience as opposed to the employer’s actual operations, the more likely the internship will be viewed as an extension of the individual’s educational experience (this often occurs where a college or university exercises oversight over the internship program and provides educational credit).  The more the internship provides the individual with skills that can be used in multiple employment settings, as opposed to skills particular to one employer’s operation, the more likely the intern would be viewed as receiving training.  Under these circumstances the intern does not perform the routine work of the business on a regular and recurring basis, and the business is not dependent upon the work of the intern.  On the other hand, if the interns are engaged in the operations of the employer or are performing productive work (for example, filing, performing other clerical work, or assisting customers), then the fact that they may be receiving some benefits in the form of a new skill or improved work habits will not exclude them from the FLSA’s minimum wage and overtime requirements because the employer benefits from the interns’ work.

Displacement And Supervision Issues

If an employer uses interns as substitutes for regular workers or to augment its existing workforce during specific time periods, these interns should be paid at least the minimum wage and overtime compensation for hours worked over forty in a workweek.  If the employer would have hired additional employees or required existing staff to work additional hours had the interns not performed the work, then the interns will be viewed as employees and entitled compensation under the FLSA.  Conversely, if the employer is providing job shadowing opportunities that allow an intern to learn certain functions under the close and constant supervision of regular employees, but the intern performs no or minimal work, the activity is more likely to be viewed as a bona fide education experience.  On the other hand, if the intern receives the same level of supervision as the employer’s regular workforce, this would suggest an employment relationship, rather than training.

Job Entitlement

The internship should be of a fixed duration, established prior to the outset of the internship.  Further, unpaid internships generally should not be used by the employer as a trial period for individuals seeking employment at the conclusion of the internship period.  If an intern is placed with the employer for a trial period with the expectation that he or she will then be hired on a permanent basis, that individual generally would be considered an employee under the FLSA.

There’s No Place Like Home

While U.S. tech companies seek opportunities in China, other U.S. firms are re–discovering the benefits of bringing off–shored production back to North America. Surprisingly, the two trends are not as contradictory as it may seem.

Several high–profile corporations have begun the process of on–shoring (also called re–shoring) business operations back to the United States including Caterpillar Inc. and General Electric Co. GE, for example, is shifting production of water heaters back to Louisville KY thanks to a more competitive labor agreement. Cookware maker All–Clad Metalcrafters is bringing production of lids for its pots and pans home to Canonsville PA. Other companies are beginning to re–evaluate their on–shoring options.

What’s prompting this change of strategy? One obvious reason: a weak U.S. dollar that makes it more expensive to purchase products from overseas vendors. Beyond this, there is a growing recognition that off–shored production –– whether in China or other overseas locations –– has its limitations (see “From East to West” in the July 2009 News archives).

In a recent article, Mike Collins, author of Saving American Manufacturing, cites several reasons for an emerging re–shoring trend by American manufacturers.

• It can be difficult to guarantee deliveries and accommodate customer change orders. Amfor Electronics, a contract manufacturer, learned this lesson and moved production back to Oregon from China.
• Damaged parts and other quality issues can negate the cost advantage of moving production to China. Many smaller U.S. manufacturers outsourced production of components to China only to be overwhelmed with costs associated with poor quality and damaged product.
• There are unanticipated costs related to financial terms, inventory requirements and shipping. One CEO noted a “double whammy:” Chinese firms won’t ship until payment is received; then, it takes another 30 days for the product to reach the U.S. Another firm cites a Chinese supplier who continually increased the minimum order size, resulting in increased inventory costs for the U.S. firm.
• Counterfeiting is always an issue. Farouk Systems, a $1 billion hair care products firm, built a new factory in Houston TX to make its hair curlers and irons after spending $6 million a year to fight counterfeiters who were knocking off the products made by its Chinese vendors (see “Welcome Home” in the October 2009 News archives).
• It can be easier and more cost–effective to customize products when production is located close to a firm’s research facilities and/or university research partners. NCR Corporation is moving production of its ATM machines from China to Columbus GA near the firm’s R&D center.
• U.S. firms can more effectively control the cost of capital by controlling the length of the supply chain. Trevor Dunthorne with All–Clad Metalcrafters noted, “If you can reduce the length of the supply chain, you can reduce the cost of capital.”

As U.S. firms evaluate re–shoring certain operations, states are gearing up to compete for new investment and jobs. “Who wouldn’t want a big industrial business in their state? The jobs are good and they pay well,” notes consultant Frank Manfredi.

Still, the re–shoring movement is just beginning and economic developers shouldn’t get too excited, cautions Scott Paul, with the Alliance of American Manufacturing. He doesn’t think that re–shoring amounts to a trend yet. Paul explains, “I would call it a trickle. Every little bit helps but the net result is that we’re still off–shoring more than we’re on–shoring.”

To build momentum, the first Re–Shoring Fair will be held in Irvine CA on May 12. Sponsored by the National Tooling and Machining Association (NTMA) and the Precision Metals Association, it will bring together 50 to 100 original equipment manufacturers with American suppliers who would like to bid on work currently outsourced by the OEMs. For more information, visit the NTMA website at www.ntma.org.

Mike Collins has more info about re–shoring on his website at: www.mpcmgt.com.

If you’ve been waiting, don’t wait much longer!!

As of 4/16/10, in the Main Street District of De Pere:

Confirmed Existing Business Locations (Main Street D.): 217
Current Known Vacant or For Lease Properties (Main Street D.): 33
Current Vacancy Rate: 217/33 = 6.58%

If you want to site your business in this area of superb demographics, great traffic, wonderful neighbors and tremendous plans for the future – you’d better hurry!

Check with our Buildings & Business Inventory to find the spot for you.

Heard on the street we need: a book store for the 18+ set (no! not an adult bookstore!), sporting goods, shoes, health and personal care, jewelry, and electronics and appliances

Manufacturing Reboot

It’s time for a re–think and reboot for many marquee manufacturing corporations, as they report their 2009 earnings.

Prompted by the economic recession, major manufacturers are re–evaluating their businesses to remain competitive and profitable. In some cases, this means shedding operations. One example is Dow Chemical which is selling its basic chemical factories –– a $2 billion operation –– in favor of more profitable specialty chemicals. The company is closing six chemical plants in Louisiana and Texas as part of this strategy. Whirlpool is also retrenching: it reduced its manufacturing capacity by 10% in 2009 and moved some operations to lower cost Mexico in response to a 9.6% sales decline. Jeff Fettig, Whirlpool chief executive, recently summed the situation up succinctly, “We are emerging from one of the most challenging economic environments we’ve seen in decades.”

For others, it means expansion. Intel Corporation sees opportunity in semiconductors–– it made headlines in the midst of the recession by announcing an aggressive two–year $7 billion investment in facilities in Chandler AZ, Rio Rancho NM and Hillsboro OR.

Analysts point to several broad changes currently underway across the manufacturing sector. First, many companies are shifting away from heavy sectors like automobiles and chemicals toward higher–tech products. Second, companies are being forced to adapt to lower demand for products; the auto industry, for example, is projecting sales between 11.5 and 12.5 million cars and trucks in 2010, well below the peak 17.5 million units sold in 2005. Third, manufacturers are controlling costs by relocating facilities to lower cost locations. This trend is already evident in the chemicals and appliance sectors. Peter Huntsman, chief executive of chemical manufacturer Huntsman Corporation, offers this blunt assessment: “The chemical industry is leaving the United States and it won’t be back. When demand picks back up, they’ll build new capacity overseas.”

The numbers are startling. U.S. industrial capacity fell by the largest year–to–year decline in history –– a full 1% decline in 2009 as the goods–producing sector lost 2.3 million jobs in just one year. Overall, the U.S. capacity to produce autos and chemicals fell 4.4% and 1.7% respectively –– the largest declines since 1949, according to the Federal Reserve. Yet, U.S. capacity to produce semiconductors grew 10.4%.

Economists are watching the manufacturing sector closely because responses by manufacturers in a post–recession world will determine when job growth resumes.

Source:
“Radical Shifts Take Hold in U.S. Manufacturing,” by Mark Whitehouse. The Wall Street Journal. February 3, 2010.

Women have vaulted to the head of the class

NEWS ALERT: SBA ANNOUNCES WOMEN’S PROCUREMENT PROGRAM

From Women Impacting Public Policy:

The U.S. Small Business Administration today released a proposed rule aimed at expanding federal contracting opportunities for women-owned small businesses (WOSB). The women’s business community has been waiting 11 years for an effective program which will help the government meet its 5% contracting goal with women.

According to a press release from the SBA, the proposed rule identifies 83 industries in which WOSBs are under-represented or substantially under-represented in the federal contract marketplace. Additionally, it removes the requirement, set forth in a prior proposed version, that each federal agency certify that it had engaged in discrimination against women-owned small businesses in order for the program to apply to contracting by that agency.

Click the following linke to read the proposed rules, SBA Press Release, and WIPP’s response statement – http://www.wipp.org/resource/resmgr/Procurement_Committee/SBAWomensProcurement.pdf

We will review the rule and provide you with a detailed analysis.

The public may submit comments to this proposed rule up until close of business on May 3, 2010, to www.regulations.gov, where they will be posted after 4pm EST today, or by mailing them to Dean Koppel, Assistant Director, Office of Policy and Research, Office of Government Contracting, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd St. SW, Washington, DC 20416. Please reference RIN 3245-AG06 when submitting comments.

Contact Angelin Barrios, WIPP Small Business Policy Analyst, at abarrios@wipp.org with any questions.

Customer relationships & marketing

Customer Relationships Are Key to Your Marketing Strategy
* Repeat customers spend 33% more than new customers.
* Referrals among repeat customers are 107% greater than non-customers.
* It costs six times more to sell something to a prospect than to sell that same thing to a customer.

Ten questions every business needs to ask itself!
1. Do we have regular on-going training in customer care skills?
2. Do we have a clear vision of what we want the customer experience to look like?
3. Do we talk about how to delight our customers at our staff meetings?
4. Is our company culture — customer-focused?
5. Do we know what our customers’ expectations are?
6. Do we have a strategy for keeping more of our customers?
7. Do we have a set of customer care standards?
8. Do we measure our performance against those standards?
9. Do we know why we lose customers?
10. Do we have a “recovery strategy” for dealing with customer problems?

Copyright 2010. Reprinted with permission from Barbara
Wold’s Retail & Consumer Tips, bwold@ix.netcom.com.

Research & Development news

The consulting firm Booz & Co., reports that major corporations are being more strategic in how they spend R&D funds.

In a survey of the world’s 1,000 top research firms, the Booz & Co. study reports that:

* Firms are defining more stringent criteria for research projects.

* Companies are focusing research on opportunities that can generate revenue faster.

* There’s been a shift from basic research to using existing technology to develop new products.

* New product opportunities in emerging markets are driving many corporate R&D efforts.

The Booz study also finds that companies are wary of cutting R&D expenditures too much in a recession because the company will be less prepared for the economic rebound.

Caterpillar, for example, developed its mainstay diesel engine for earthmoving machines in 1931 during the Great Depression. Tana Utley, is Caterpillar’s chief technology officer. Looking back at the 1931 example, she explained, “We spent $1 million on that and I’m sure my predecessor felt some of the same pressure I feel today. If you don’t invest in R&D during the downturn, you’ll feel like a hero during the day because you saved money, but you’ll be a heel in the history books.”

While Caterpillar significantly cut R&D expenses by 13% last year, research funding as a percent of revenue jumped from 3.2% to 4.4%.

Source:

“With Eye on Competition, Firms Keep Spending on R&D” by Dana Mattioli. The Wall Street Journal. November 30, 2009.