My company does not.  We do however run certain candidates,  depending on job title, through an additional background check to see if they had ever been convicted of embezzlement, etc.  These are positions that work in Financial Aid or have access to such information.  With those candidates having that access, I do not think it is unfair to be running the additional check.

What are your thoughts?

They mention that there are 5 workers for every one opening.  I had recently posted a position on Career Builder for a Temporary Customer Service position available in NYC and within a few days received over 100 resumes.  The position specifies that it is only Temporary but due to the economy, people are willing to take whatever they can get.

SHRM had an interesting article regarding accommodations for  co-workers going through the transition.  In many cases (as within my company) the decision on which bathroom is to be used was based on the co-worker’s identity and presentation.

Has anyone else experienced this within their workplace?

The benefits of drug testing seem quite obvious… so why don’t all companies do so with all new employees?  Hiring a user can become more costly than the $30 cost of a urine sample.  This article discussed the increased chances of theft or workplace injury.  But, I am sure there are worse reasons than those (I have a story of where drug testing may have helped avoid a situation.. if someone reminds me, I will share it during class).  There will still be employees who pass the drug test and become problem employees, but I think a large part of conducting this pre-hire test is also to deter those problem employees from even applying.

I found it humorous (and sad) that when I started searching for information on drug testing the first articles and videos that popped up were about how to beat the test.  You truly can find anything on the internet.

You may even be continuing your education on your company’s dime, whether they are paying for your entire education or a portion.

Is this a trend that, like many trends, will have an end?  I hope not!  There are a number of reasons why companies would want to jump on the Tuition Reimbursement bus.  As noted in this article, first the foremost it has proven helpful to recruit a higher quality employee who will be more productive.  Being in HR, it is a great selling point to many candidates I speak with on a regular basis.  Another reason would be employee retention.  Many companies offering tuition reimbursement also have a contract that goes along with the money they are fronting for your education.  For example, at my company, you must be employed with them for one full year before becoming eligible to receive the reimbursement, and upon completion of your degree, you must remain employed with them for 2 years to avoid paying any portion of the reimbursement back to the company.  They are guaranteed to have a coworker for at minimum 4 years by doing this.  One year to be employed, one year to complete a degree program (or longer), and two years after graduating the program.  Another huge benefit for companies is the knowledge that these students can bring to work with them (I think our Contemporary topics class alone proves that to be true).

This is a win-win for both employees and employers.

Do any of your companies provide such assistance for their employees?

For example, our locations and coworkers are measured on student attendance, retention, attrition, placement, etc.  But, is this a fair and efficient way to measure success?

Why do we use these as measurements?  One reason is to comply with standards set by NACCAS (see page 2) to keep accreditation.  Also, attendance must remain at a certain level to continue to be eligible for Title IV funding.  Both are extremely important to the success of the company.

But, is it right to measure performance based on attendance?  Can we force students to come to class?  It has been a common criticism among coworkers.  It certainly is black or white.  But, is it used because it is easier than using unquantifiable measurements?  Are these metrics good measurements for success?  I am hoping the more research I do, the more I will be answer that question.

Upon entering the beauty industry, I was hit by the reality bus that things ran slightly different in the Empire world than the KU world I was used to.  First and foremost, students paid by attended hour, not by credit.  So, if a student does not attend, they receive some sort of reimbursement on the tuition that is being charged.   This was a concept I had never heard of – Being refunded for hours not attended???  If I missed a class at KU, I was never seeing a penny in reimbursement for that class that I missed.  Now, the reasoning behind it does make sense.  But, it was still a concept that took some getting used to.  To simply explain, if I miss a class at KU for my MBA, yet I still achieve passing grades, I will still receive my MBA.  Students at KU (and other universities alike) much achieve a certain amount of credits to be able to graduate.  On the other hand, students are required to attend a certain amount of hours (not credits) to be able to graduate with their cosmetology license.  So, if a student misses hours, they must be made up in order to graduate.  That being said, it has become a very important metric to be able to keep students enrolled in our program.  Hence, if we do not, we are losing out.

Because of compliance with accreditation and other rules, we have found it beneficial to measure co-workers on a number of different metrics.  For example, attendance (as noted above is very important).  Another metric that is used is Student Placement.  Each school is measured on how successful they are in placing students in jobs upon graduation.  [On a side note, there is one obstacle that students must overcome before graduating in order to be able to practice cosmetology, which is the State Board Exam.]  So, it is in the schools’ best interest to find jobs for new graduates, not only for their own metrics, but for the reputation of the company as well.  The better our placement ratings, the more appealing we are to prospective students (like any college).

How do we achieve high placement among grads?  Among other things, there is a Job Board in every school with local salon openings available.  These positions are ever growing for our grads.  But, the one area that we may sometimes fall short is consistency among our schools.  The curriculum and teaching methodologies are the same, but is it being delivered consistently across the board?  Or more like, across the United States?  We have schools from Maine to Florida to Arizona and everywhere in-between.  Does the information tend to get lost in translation?

Because the industry can never be online (How would you learn to cut hair online?  If my hairdresser received her license through online education, I would run for the hills!), teaching methods must be consistent for all our students to receive a consistent education.  How can things be kept consistent in a company with 100 locations across the United States?  How do your companies keep consistency with their various locations?

I have seen on the news that it has been increasingly difficult for graduates in teaching to find jobs more so than any other profession.

Is the unemployment rate among recent grads relative to their industry?  Or is it difficult for all grads equally?

Dr. Weyant mentioned something to me that I think I am going to run with and research more.  I want to look at the unemployment rate of college graduates in general… as well as industry specific.  Namely – the recent graduates from my company.  What are their chances of landing a job right after graduating?

In the next few weeks I plan to speak with numerous coworkers to research placement rates, etc.