However, the Biden Administration’s January 20, 2021, regulatory freeze memorandum forced the agency to withdraw the Proposed Wellness Rules on February 12, 2021. Employers are now left with little concrete guidance to navigate implementing and administering wellness programs, including incentives for COVID-19 vaccines.

The EEOC had issued the Proposed Wellness Rules to update its position regarding the maximum level of incentives employers may offer under wellness programs without violating the ADA. The Proposed Wellness Rules became necessary after a 2018 federal court decision invalidated EEOC’s 2016 final wellness rules that permitted employers to offer an incentive or penalty up to 30% of the cost of self-only coverage for an employee to disclose ADA-protected information under a wellness program. The 2016 rules also permitted employers to offer a wellness incentive or penalty up to 30% of the cost of self-only coverage for disclosure of a spouse’s manifestation of diseases or disorders.

The Proposed Wellness Rules would have prohibited employers from offering employees any wellness incentives above a de minimis amount, though certain health-contingent programs under a group health plan could follow 2013 HIPAA regulations that permitted incentives of up to 30% of the cost of coverage (50% for tobacco use prevention or reduction). The EEOC listed examples of de minimis incentives that included water bottles and gift cards of nominal value. However, the agency offered no additional examples or definitions of what qualified as a de minimis incentive.

So, questions remain for employers who wish to implement or continue wellness programs that include incentives. Employers could possibly choose to offer no wellness incentives, offer only de minimis incentives like those in the Proposed Wellness Rules, offer incentives under 2013 HIPAA rules, or offer incentives less than the amounts permitted under the EEOC’s final 2016 rules. The EEOC states on its website that it is considering next steps for new proposed wellness rules but offers no timeline for when it might issue new proposed rules.

COVID-19 Vaccine Incentives

Now that COVID-19 vaccine distribution is ramping up, many employers are seeking to incentivize their employees to get inoculated. Some employers have provided or considered incentives ranging from cash to gifts to paid time off. In response to the mass rollout of COVID-19 vaccines, a large group of businesses and associations requested that the EEOC provide guidance on employers offering wellness incentives to workers to encourage getting a COVID-19 vaccine without violating the ADA and other laws. To date, the EEOC has issued no specific guidance, so employers who wish to offer anything more than a de minimis incentive like a nominal gift card should seek counsel to ensure the incentive will not be deemed coercive and violate the ADA.

Also, employers considering providing a COVID-19 vaccine incentive must remember that some employees may not be able to receive a vaccine due to religious beliefs or medical conditions. Thus, employers who offer incentives for the COVID-19 vaccine are still required to make reasonable accommodations for employees who are unable to earn the vaccine incentive, such as providing alternative training or resources related to COVID-19 safety.

ICHRAs and the ADEA

The EEOC recently issued a Commission Opinion Letter addressing whether employers may offer employees an Individual Coverage Health Reimbursement Arrangement (ICHRA) funded by defined employer contributions for the purchase of an age-rated individual major medical health insurance policy without violating the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). The EEOC considered the following two scenarios.

• An employer provides a $300 per month defined contribution to an ICHRA for each employee. For a 55-year-old employee, the $300 may cover a much smaller portion of health insurance premium costs than it would for a 22-year-old employee because current law allows age rating of individual major medical health insurance policies following a specified age curve that allows variation in premium costs based on age.
• An employer provides a specified percentage, 30% per month, contribution of premium costs to an ICHRA for all employees. If the cost of an individual major medical health insurance policy for a 55-year-old is $1,000, then a 30% contribution toward the employee’s ICHRA is $300. The cost of the same policy for a 22year-old is $250, so the 30% contribution is $75.

Background

An ICHRA is a type of health reimbursement arrangement (HRA) created by regulations issued by the Department of the Treasury, Department of Labor, and Department of Health and Human Services. Employers could begin offering ICHRAs to employees beginning on January 1, 2020. ICHRAs differ from traditional HRAs because ICHRAs must be integrated with individual health insurance coverage, as opposed to group health plan coverage.

Under the ADEA, older employees cannot be required, as a condition of employment, to make greater contributions for fringe benefits than younger employees. However, older workers may be required, as a condition of participating in a voluntary employee benefit plan, to make greater contributions than younger employees, but only if they are not required to contribute a greater portion of the total premium costs than younger employees where the employee and employer contribute to the benefit.

First Scenario

In considering the first scenario, the EEOC explained that it first had to determine whether an ICHRA qualifies as an “employee benefit plan” covered by the ADEA. The EEOC noted that it needed to weigh both the ICHRA as well as the underlying individual health insurance policy.

The EEOC determined that an ICHRA funded entirely by the employer is not subject to the ADEA restrictions on contributory plans. Moreover, because the employer makes the same contribution to all employees, it does not result in lesser compensation to older employees.

The EEOC further determined that, if an employer has no control over the individual insurance policies that employees purchase with ICHRA funds, and the employer plays no role in making the policies available to employees who purchase the coverage from independent third parties with no employer involvement in their selection, the underlying individual insurance policies are not ADEA-covered employee benefit plans. Thus, no ADEA violation occurs despite older employees paying a larger share of the policy cost relative to what they would pay if they were younger, or relative to the share that younger ICHRA participants pay.

Second Scenario

The EEOC found that the second scenario also does not violate the ADEA. Under the percentage contribution design, older employees would effectively be getting a greater level of compensation. The EEOC explained that providing larger amounts to older workers based on their age does not violate the ADEA. Thus, employers can increase their contributions to older employees' ICHRAs to offset age-based increases to their health plan costs without violating the ADEA.

The EEOC also generally noted that ICHRA regulations prohibit employers from decreasing the maximum available dollar amount as a participant ages, so compliant ICHRAs will not violate the ADEA's prohibition against providing decreased compensation on the basis of age.

What This Means for Employers

Employers may offer ICHRAs where the employer contributes either a uniform dollar amount or uniform premium percentage to each employee.  These designs will not violate the ADEA.

Background

In 2020, shortly after the President declared a National Emergency due to the COVID-19 outbreak, EBSA issued Disaster Relief Notice 2020-01 (Notice 2020-01). Additionally, the Department of Labor (DOL), the Department of the Treasury, and the Internal Revenue Service issued the Notice of Extension of Certain Timeframes for Employee Benefits Plans, Participants, and Beneficiaries Affected by the COVID-19 Outbreak (Joint Notice). The Joint Notice and Notice 2020-01 (Notices) applied ERISA Section 518 to allow employee benefit plans, plan participants and beneficiaries, employers and other plan sponsors, plan fiduciaries, and other service providers to disregard a period of up to one year (beginning March 1, 2020) in determining the date by which certain required or permitted actions must occur.

 

The Notices stated that the relief would continue during a period that started March 1, 2020, and would end 60 days after the officially announced end of the COVID-19 National Emergency or another date announced in future guidance (Outbreak Period). As previously noted, however, the maximum duration of the deadline relief is one year under ERISA Section 518. Since the National Emergency recently extended beyond March 1, 2021, practitioners and other interested parties were left to wonder whether relief under the Notices would extend beyond February 28, 2021.

Relief Provided

The Notices provided relief to plans that acted in good faith, including using alternate electronic means, to disclose the following items as soon as administratively practicable:

• Plan document
• Summary Plan Description (SPD)
• Summary of Benefits and Coverage (SBC)
• Summary of Material Modification (SMM)
• Summary of Material Reduction (SMR)
• Summary Annual Report (SAR)
• COBRA general and election notices
• Marketplace notice
• CHIP notice
• HIPAA special enrollment rights notice
• Grandfathered status notification
• Newborns’ and Mothers’ Health Protection Act description
• Michelle’s Law notice
• Women’s Health and Cancer Rights Act notification

The Notices also allowed participants and beneficiaries relief from deadlines to:

• Request HIPAA special enrollment
• Elect COBRA coverage
• Pay COBRA premiums
• Notify plan administrator of certain qualifying events or disability determinations
• File a claim for plan benefits
• Appeal an adverse benefit determination
• Request an external review, or file information to perfect a request for external review, of an adverse benefit determination

Notice 2021-01

Notice 2021-01 announces that individuals and plans with deadlines and timeframes subject to relief provided by the Notices will be able to disregard a period that ends on the earlier of (a) the date that is one year from the date they were first eligible for relief, or (b) 60 days after the announced end of the National Emergency (the end of the Outbreak Period). Thus, deadline relief will last for a maximum period of one year.

Notice 2021-01 explains the maximum relief period as follows:

• If a qualified beneficiary would have been required to make a COBRA election by March 1, 2020, the Joint Notice delays that requirement until February 28, 2021, which is the earlier of one year from March 1, 2020, or the end of the Outbreak Period (which remains ongoing). Similarly, if a qualified beneficiary would have been required to make a COBRA election by March 1, 2021, the Joint Notice delays that election requirement until the earlier of one year from that date (March 1, 2022) or the end of the Outbreak Period.
• Likewise, if a plan would have been required to furnish a notice or disclosure by March 1, 2020, the relief under the Notices would end with respect to that notice or disclosure on February 28, 2021. The responsible plan fiduciary would be required to ensure that the notice or disclosure was furnished on or before March 1, 2021.

There is some confusion as to why February 28 is deemed to be one year in the first example, while March 1 is the deadline in the second example, but Notice 2021-01 specifically states that any permissible delay should not exceed one year. Thus, employer plan sponsors should ensure that they disregard no more than 365 days when complying with applicable notice, disclosure and deadline requirements.

Notice Form Relief

Notice 2020-01 also stated that plans and fiduciaries would not be deemed to have violated applicable notice and disclosure rules if they acted in good faith to furnish any required notice, disclosure or document as soon as administratively practicable under the circumstances. Good faith acts include using electronic alternative means of communicating with plan participants and beneficiaries who the plan administrator reasonably believes have effective access to electronic means of communication, including email, text messages, and continuous access websites. Notice 2021-01 states that notices and disclosures properly furnished without relying on the relief in Notice 2020-01 do not need to be refurnished. Moreover, if a plan can demonstrate that a participant or beneficiary received a notice or disclosure, the plan does not need to refurnish it even if initially furnished by relying on Notice 202001 relief.

Ongoing Enforcement

The DOL notes that the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic might cause problems for plan participants and beneficiaries who no longer have the relief provided by the Notices due to the one-year limit on that relief. The DOL suggests that plan sponsors and fiduciaries should make reasonable accommodations to prevent any loss or delay in payment of benefits in such cases and should take steps to minimize the possibility of individuals losing benefits because of a failure to comply with pre-established timeframes.

For example, the DOL states that where a plan administrator or other responsible plan fiduciary knows, or should reasonably know, that the end of the relief period for an individual action will cause a participant or beneficiary to lose protections, benefits, or rights under a plan, the administrator or other fiduciary should consider affirmatively sending a notice regarding the end of the relief period. Also, Notice 2021-01 provides that plan fiduciaries and sponsors might need to reissue or amend disclosures issued prior to or during the pandemic if such disclosures failed to provide accurate information regarding the time in which participants and beneficiaries were required to act.

Further, ERISA group health plans should consider ways to ensure that participants and beneficiaries who are losing coverage under their group health plans are made aware of other coverage options that may be available to them, including telling them that they could obtain coverage through a Marketplace special enrollment period that under Executive Order continues through May 15, 2021.

The DOL acknowledges that there may be instances when full and timely compliance with ERISA’s disclosure and claims processing requirements by plans and service providers may not be possible, including when pandemic-related disruptions to a plan’s principal place of business makes compliance with pre-established timeframes for certain claims' decisions or disclosures impossible. In the case of fiduciaries that have acted in good faith and with reasonable diligence under the circumstances, the DOL states that it will emphasize compliance assistance, including grace periods and other relief, when enforcing ERISA’s requirements.

Conclusion

The Agencies continue to monitor the effects of the COVID-19 outbreak as they relate to employee benefit plans. The Agencies have said that they understand that continued relief may be needed to preserve and protect private-sector employee benefit plans and have announced that they intend to continue to engage with interested parties on whether and, if so, how to better target relief to focus on areas in which participants and beneficiaries continue to need relief and as plans continue to move toward a normal compliance status as we move closer to the end of the Outbreak Period.

Plans and plan sponsors should continue to watch for additional agency guidance. In the meantime, they should be careful to properly apply relief provided under the Notices according to the maximum period outlined in Notice 2021-01.

Group Health Plan Penalties

	2021 Penalty	Change
Form 5500 maximum penalty for failing to file a Form 5500	$2,259 per day that the filing is late	Up from $2,233 per day
Summary of Benefits Coverage (SBC) maximum penalty for failing to provide SBC	$1,190 per failure	Up from $1,176 per failure
Violations of Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) such as establishing eligibility rules based on genetic information or requesting genetic information for underwriting purposes	$120 per participant per day	Up from $119 per participant per day
Failures relating to disclosures relating to the availability of Medicaid or children’s health insurance program (CHIP) assistance	$120 per participant per day	Up from $119 per participant per day
Failure to furnish plan-related information requested by the DOL, which are required under ERISA to be provided to the DOL upon request	Up to $161 per day, but not to exceed $1,613 per request	Up from $159 per day, but not to exceed $1,594 per request

Retirement Plans

	2021 Penalty	Change
Failure to provide required ERISA § 514(e) preemption notice for plans with automatic contribution arrangements	$1,788 per day	Up from $1,767 per day
Failure to provide blackout notices (required in advance of certain periods during which participants may not change their investments or take loans or distributions) or notices of diversification rights	$143 per day	Up from $141 per day
Failure to comply with ERISA § 209(b) recordkeeping and reporting requirements	$31 per employee	No change
Failure to furnish plan-related information requested by the DOL, which are required under ERISA to be provided to the DOL upon request	Up to $161 per day, but not to exceed $1,613 per request	Up from $159 per day, but not to exceed $1,594 per request

Multiple Employer Welfare Arrangements (MEWAs)

 

	2021 Penalty	Change
Failure to meet applicable filing requirements, which include annual Form M-1 filings and filings upon origination	$1,644 per day	Up from $1,625

Next Steps for Employers

Because the Department of Labor is required to adjust penalty amounts each year to account for inflation, the cost of compliance errors continues to rise. The DOL has discretion to impose lower penalties in some instances, so not all violations will result in the maximum permitted penalty.  However, penalties still can be severe, so employers should become familiar with the increased penalty amounts and review their plan administrative policies and procedures to redouble their efforts to ensure compliance with ERISA requirements.

Who is Eligible?

Assistance eligible individuals include qualified beneficiaries who, due to a reduction in hours or involuntary employment termination, become eligible for or already have effective COBRA continuation coverage during the period that begins April 1, 2021, and ends September 30, 2021. Since assistance eligible individuals include those already receiving continuation coverage as of April 1, 2021, certain qualified beneficiaries whose COBRA coverage started as long ago as November 2019 could qualify for ARPA premium assistance.

Terminations Must Be Voluntary

The law precludes any qualified beneficiary whose termination of employment was voluntary from being assistance eligible. However, the standard an employer should use to determine voluntariness is unclear. Moreover, it could be difficult for an employer to know (particularly for past terminations as far back as 2019) whether a termination was voluntary or not. We expect further guidance from the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) to clarify these questions. Future guidance likely also will address whether employers will need to provide a notice to all qualified beneficiaries and later determine whether they voluntarily terminated, or predetermine which terminations were voluntary and send notices only to individuals they identify as having been involuntarily terminated.

Extended Qualified Beneficiaries

Additionally, ARPA provides for COBRA premium assistance for qualified beneficiaries who were eligible to elect COBRA continuation coverage due to involuntary termination or reduction in hours but who had not yet elected as of April 1, 2021, or who had elected such coverage but discontinued it prior to April 1, 2021 (Extended Qualified Beneficiary or EQB). EQBs essentially get a second chance to elect COBRA during a new 60-day election window provided under ARPA.

Special Extended Election Period

EQBs must elect COBRA during a period that begins on April 1, 2021, and ends 60 days after the plan administrator provides a newly required notice alerting them that they qualify for COBRA premium assistance under ARPA. The law requires the DOL to issue model notices for this use by no later than April 10, 2021, and plan administrators must furnish the notices to EQBs by no later than May 31, 2021.

EQB Coverage Period

EQB coverage will begin with the first period of coverage that begins on or after April 1, 2021, and will not extend beyond what would have been the maximum applicable COBRA continuation period had an EQB timely elected COBRA continuation coverage or not discontinued such coverage. In other words, ARPA’s COBRA provisions will not serve to extend a qualified beneficiary’s maximum COBRA period determined according to his or her original qualifying event.

Model Notices

In addition to specific EQB notices, ARPA generally requires plan administrators to notify qualified beneficiaries who become eligible for COBRA between April 1, 2021, and September 30, 2021, that COBRA premium assistance is available by either amending existing COBRA qualifying event notices or including with them a separate written notice that:

• describes any forms necessary for establishing COBRA premium assistance eligibility.
• provides the name, address, and telephone information for the plan administrator or other individual maintaining relevant information regarding COBRA premium assistance.
• explains the extended election period available to EQBs.
• notifies qualified beneficiaries that they must tell the group health plan if they become eligible for other group health coverage or Medicare or be subject to a $250 penalty (higher if intentional).
• prominently describes the right to subsidized coverage as well as any conditions on receiving subsidized coverage.

The statute is unclear as to whether the DOL will provide model language to include in general notices to all qualified beneficiaries, but we expect further guidance to clarify this point.

Premium Assistance Period

Assistance eligible individuals, including EQBs, will cease to be eligible for ARPA’s COBRA premium assistance for any month of coverage beginning on or after the earlier of the date they become eligible for either other group health coverage or Medicare. COBRA premium assistance also will end as of the earlier of the date following the date the applicable maximum COBRA continuation coverage period expires or, in the case of an EQB, the date following the date that the period of COBRA coverage that would have been required had the COBRA election been made by, or had not been discontinued before, April 1, 2021.

ARPA requires plan administrators to notify affected qualified beneficiaries before ARPA premium assistance expires except in cases where an individual becomes eligible for other group health coverage or Medicare. The notice must clearly state when COBRA premium assistance will expire, as well as inform the qualified beneficiary that he or she still may be eligible for group health coverage without premium assistance under either COBRA or another group health plan.

Plan administrators must provide this notice no sooner than 45 days before, and no later than 15 days before, premium assistance will expire. The DOL will issue model notices by no later than April 25.

Premium Assistance Tax Credits

Employers will be able to claim a dollar-for-dollar Medicare tax credit for any applicable COBRA premium assistance provided under ARPA. The amount of available tax credit will equal the COBRA premiums not paid by an employer’s qualifying assistance eligible individuals. The Treasury Department will provide further guidance and details, including necessary forms and instructions, regarding tax credit offsets.

COBRA Premium Refunds

ARPA requires that plan sponsors refund COBRA premiums paid by assistance eligible individuals for periods of coverage beginning on or after April 1, 2021, and ending September 30, 2021. Plan sponsors must issue refunds by no later than 60 days after the date on which qualified beneficiaries paid COBRA premiums for coverage during the premium assistance period. Employers will be able to claim ARPA tax credits to offset these COBRA premium refunds.

Permissible Coverage Election Changes

ARPA also permits, but does not require, a plan sponsor to allow qualified beneficiaries to switch their group health plan election to a different employer-sponsored plan if:

• the premium cost for that plan is not higher than for the plan in which the qualified beneficiary is enrolled.
• the plan sponsor offers the plan to similarly situated active employees.
• the coverage is not just excepted benefits, a qualified small employer health reimbursement arrangement (QSEHRA) or a health flexible spending arrangement (HFSA).

Interplay with Prior COVID-19 COBRA Relief

In April 2020, the agencies that enforce COBRA issued a Notice that allowed plan administrators and qualified beneficiaries to ignore a period known as the Outbreak Period (March 1, 2020, through 60 days after the officially declared end to the National Emergency originally declared last March by the President) for purposes of standard COBRA notice, election and premium payment deadlines. Recent guidance clarified that the maximum period during which the Notice’s COBRA relief could apply will be the earlier of one year from the first day that a plan or individual became eligible for the relief, or the end of the Outbreak Period.

The relief provided under the Notice likely expands the number of assistance eligible individuals who can get ARPA COBRA premium relief, since many might still be in an extended election period for coverage that would include periods between April 1, 2021, and September 30, 2021. Presumably these individuals would be able to elect retroactive COBRA coverage for periods prior to April 1, 2021, though prior coverage periods would not qualify for premium assistance.

ARPA sets several new definite COBRA election and notice deadlines that will apply to EQBs and plans. It is unlikely that prior Notice guidance extending COBRA deadlines will also act to extend any new deadlines imposed by ARPA.

Conclusion

We expect future DOL and IRS guidance to provide greater detail regarding premium assistance eligibility, newly required notices, claiming available tax credits, determining employment termination voluntariness and the interplay between prior COBRA deadline extension guidance and ARPA’s COBRA assistance provisions. We will continue to monitor this issue and provide relevant updates as needed.

IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: We inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachment) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed therein. (The foregoing disclaimer has been affixed pursuant to U.S. Treasury regulations governing tax practitioners.)

This newsletter is brought to you by your Partner Firm of United Benefit Advisors – the nation’s leading independent employee benefits advisory organization with more than 200 Partner offices in the U.S., Canada, England, and Ireland – and Fisher Phillips. With 34 offices and attorneys practicing throughout the U.S., Fisher Phillips provides the resources to address every aspect of the employee/employer relationship. This newsletter is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between Fisher Phillips LLP. and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited without the express written consent of Fisher Phillips. This newsletter may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

 

Brainstorm Techniques to Elevate Team Creativity

“How should we fix this problem?” is a question that has been asked time and again in the boardroom, around the lunch table and likely on your last Zoom call at work. In this scenario, some may look to the most experienced person in the room or on the call to decide. Sometimes we invite the group to share feedback on what was done the last time. Instead of using one of these common solutions, try inviting one of these brainstorming techniques to your next meeting to elevate team creativity.

Start with a word game.

Free association is the process of relaying the first word that comes to mind based upon another word or image. During the process, don’t stick to a specific structure; rather let new words generate organically from the group at random. This exercise taps into your subconscious and opens the door to new ideas or considerations that brainstormers would have previously kept under wraps. Identify a member of the team to take notes, set a timer and go!

Reframe the question.

Another technique involves restating the original question in ten different ways to frame the problem in a new way. For example, you may start with the inquiry, “How can we increase our client service rates?” Your team can then rally to come up with related questions such as:

• What does exceptional client service look like at our company?
• What does exceptional client service mean to our clients?
• How would we know we were delivering exceptional client service?

This simple reframing can help generate new ideas and may outline a better question for the group to answer.

Invite “outsiders” to the table.

What is mundane to you may be novel to someone else. That’s why it pays to invite a special guest to your next brainstorm session. Invite colleagues who work in different functions; they can add new information to the story or look at the problem from a different point of view. Invite individuals from other companies altogether; you can ask them to participate in your brainstorm or invite them to present on a topic prior to your team attacking a problem. A new perspective goes a long way in opening creative pathways. And if you can’t find someone available for that meeting, bring an inspirational Ted Talk to kick off the session.

In summary, doing the same thing and expecting different results will unlikely lead to amazing results. Instead, try a new tactic. Even something as basic as hosting the meeting in a new location or asking attendees to step outside can get creative juices flowing.

 

First-Time Manager Faux Pas

Just like a bad Yelp review, most employees can recall a boss (or two) that they would give a low management rating. Maybe it was the boss who didn’t respect their time outside of the office or the one who asked for results with an unreasonably short deadline. Or maybe it was the supervisor who didn’t take the time to get to know their new direct report. Regardless of the reason, even the best supervisors will make mistakes or decisions that their employees don’t support. Managers are human too!

The leap from individual contributor to manager is a big one and deserves thoughtful preparation. New managers want to avoid these common manager faux pas when taking the leap to leadership.

Not acknowledging a change in relationship with peers. Let’s first acknowledge that being promoted to manage a team of your peers is tough to begin with. One day, you’re making plans for after work happy hour, the next day you’re giving feedback on their performance. It’s incredibly important to discuss this relationship change with each member of your new team. Tell them what may be different now that you are their manager. For example, you may need to limit your lunch dates with your “bestie” to avoid complaints of favoritism. Open the floor to their concerns or questions as well; avoiding this topic may lead to resentment.

Focusing on “doing” instead of leading. Some employees moving into management can’t seem to keep their hands out of the day-to-day. Instead of providing guidance or removing obstacles from the path of their team, they micromanage or take parts of the work back to complete. Often, they fall back into execution because it’s what they did best in their prior role. In some cases, a star salesperson or excellent analyst may find in due time that they prefer being in the independent contributor role to managing. This is okay! It’s good to know yourself and your preferences.

Making drastic changes early in the transition. A big management blunder occurs when a leader comes into a new role and immediately trashes existing ideas, processes, and roadmaps with the intent of starting from scratch. It’s key to observe and listen to feedback from those around you prior to making changes. There is a story behind every decision, and what at first glance may look like a poor solution, may in fact make a lot of sense when you ask those around you and investigate further. This is a hard one as new managers may feel the need to prove their competency early on. Hold back! This restraint is a sign of your maturity as a leader.

New supervisors can avoid some common gaffes if they avoid the rookie mistakes above. Managing other people is hard; don’t let anyone tell you otherwise! It’s important for managers to build trust by showing vulnerability with a new team. A manager willing to admit they make mistakes and don’t know everything will encourage strong relationships with their employees.

Take Ten: The 50-Minute Meeting

The clock on the computer screen blinks 3:00 p.m. and it dawns on you that you haven’t eaten your first (or second!) meal of the day. Nor have you stood up from your desk to stretch your legs or used the restroom. Your back feels tight and you have the early stages of a raging migraine. The diagnosis? Meeting fatigue. You had a calendar full of back-to-back meetings with zero time for yourself and are starting to feel the repercussions. Research shows that employees’ stress levels mount as they bounce from meeting to meeting without a break, even when working from home. The solution? It could be as simple as cutting ten minutes from your hour-long meeting.

Microsoft’s Human Factors Lab recently conducted an experiment to investigate the toll continuous meetings take on our physical and mental health. They looked specifically at the brain’s reaction to a full day of meetings. Beta waves, the brain activity associated with stress, increased when study participants were shuttled from meeting to meeting without a meaningful break. It is also key to know that the actual transition from each meeting (dialing in to a new call or gathering your notes to walk to a new location) tended to add to their stress levels as well. Without a chance for a real break, your stress levels only increase as a meeting-filled day goes on. You may be on overload by the time you are called on to deal with an unexpected situation and overreact because of this “trigger stacking.”

The good news? When participants were given just ten minutes of down time to rest or meditate, their beta waves decreased. This reset time allowed them to be more present and engaged in their next meeting. So, the real question is, do you want your meeting participants to be alert and ready to innovate? Or are you okay with participants who are too stressed to focus?

While scientists are tackling the long-term solution, a good step in the right direction is to limit the meeting length at your organization (or at least on your calendar) to allow for rest breaks. Introducing this idea at work can start with little fanfare – model the behavior first. Start scheduling your meetings to start ten minutes after the hour or plan for an early departure. Communicate the reason for this adjustment and what you plan to do with the time: “Our meeting is going to run 50 minutes, so we all have a chance to rest and refocus before our next commitment. I plan to take my dog outside for a few minutes and come back ready to go!”

The Pomodoro Technique: Can You Find More Time with Tomatoes?

Who holds the key to time management? Is it your partner who diligently uses a paper planner to chart out all meetings in pencil? Or your boss who devotes the last hour of their day to track and organize projects? Or maybe it’s you? You fire up your laptop hours before your peers so you can experience some of that sweet uninterrupted prime time where you blast through hours of work. Corporate America has revisited the riddle of proper time management for years, resulting in a slew of potential solutions to rehabilitate your calendar quandary. There are models, methods, and technologies galore! One of those methods to consider in the quest for time management transcendentalism is the Pomodoro technique. This method may be a good solution for employees looking to find more focus in their workday.

The Italian productivity advocate Francesco Cirillo invented the Pomodoro Technique. The first part of the name, pomodoro, is the Italian word for tomato; Francesco used a timer in the shape of this ruby red vegetable (or fruit, depending on who you ask!) to track his time and keep him on task.

There are five simple steps, and just like Francesco, you only need a timer (a phone timer will work just fine) to start.

• Identify your list of action items/tasks for the day
• Set a timer for 25 minutes (a “pomodoro”)
• Work on one focused task until the timer sounds
• Take a five-minute break to stand up, rest, etc.
• Repeat on a new task, tracking how many “pomodoros” it took you to complete each task

Though the guidelines are simple, the rules are stricter. First, no cheating! You may be curious about an email that pinged your inbox, or want to check the weather, but you must wait until your five-minute break. Second, you must track how many “pomodoros” it takes for you to complete each task. This part of the process refines your ability to estimate future assignments. And third, you can’t keep working even if you really, really want to and can‘t cut the time short, either. The process relies on dedicated work time mixed with consistent breaks to free up your thoughts. In fact, the Pomodoro Technique requires that you take a larger break after completing three or four “pomodoros.”

Fans of the method enjoy the dedicated deep thought time and like that they can clearly see their accomplishments, or “pomodoros,” at the end of the day. Certain jobs lend themselves nicely to this technique. For example, coders using an agile framework may already be comfortable estimating their time and completing focused tasks. On a similar note, the work of writers and website designers is also a potentially good match because the final work product is easily diced into smaller subtasks. On the other hand, the Pomodoro Technique may be more difficult to implement for client-facing roles or those that require a meeting-heavy schedule. Workers that don’t control their schedule may have trouble implementing this strategy since they would be regularly pulled from their work sprints.

Curious? Try it out! Take a week to pilot and see if adding this type of structure helps you stay focused.

Managers have a slew of responsibilities related to supervising employee productivity and overseeing business operations. But it doesn’t stop there. Managers are also tasked with being knowledgeable in a handful of policies and procedures to support their employees. For example, a manager without basic knowledge of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) may unknowingly provide inaccurate information to employees. It is easier than you think to make a mistake like this when dealing with a complicated policy. If managers know the basics of FMLA interpretation at their organization, they are better prepared to support employees and involve Human Resources at the right time. Identifying the answers to these questions will set the groundwork for a manager FMLA primer.

What is FMLA?

On a broad level, FMLA offers employees meeting specific family and medical reasons up to 12 weeks of leave with job protection and continued access to healthcare within a 12-month period. “Job protection” means eligible employees are guaranteed to return to their same job or a similar role after their leave. This point is key as employees may not realize why FMLA is important to job security.

Are our employees covered under FMLA?

This question speaks to the fact that not all FMLA plans or policies are created equally. The Department of Labor offers guidelines to determine employer and employee eligibility for the federal program on its website. Requirements include conditions such as number of employees within a geographic area, hours worked for the employer, and qualifying conditions such as birth of a child or caring for a sick family member. Some employers who do not meet the criteria may implement a policy to support an “employee-first” culture.

Since coverage may vary by employee and FMLA notification guidelines are strict, it is important to notify HR if an employee is taking time off that may be considered FMLA-eligible. FMLA leave cannot be backdated so it is better to be safe than sorry!

Are our employees paid while on FMLA?

This is where it gets complicated! The federal program is unpaid. However, some states or districts have implemented paid family and medical leave programs with varying rules and time periods. As of February 2021, this included California, New Jersey, Rhode Island, New York, Washington, the District of Columbia, and Massachusetts.

Workers in states that do not have paid FMLA leave may often use other types of paid time off during their protected leave. For example, workers may be able to apply for short-term disability or use sick or vacation time, if available, to supplement their income during this time.

 

The Department of Labor continues to expand the FMLA policy; most recently, it was amended with the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) to grant emergency FMLA leave for family members impacted by the coronavirus (COVID-19). A manager educated in FMLA basics is more prepared to support the many needs of employees both in and out of the office. In addition, ongoing FMLA manager training helps the company stay in compliance with federal mandates.

The first day returning to the office after a 14-month hiatus may feel like the first day of school. You don a new outfit (your sweats don’t seem office appropriate!), grab your packed lunch (not sure what restaurants will be open), and jump in your car early to make that 8:30 a.m. meeting in the office. Under the surface of your well-prepared appearance, you are a jumble of nerves. You have had a hard time sleeping since the company announced that the office was reopening. Your heart beats fast when you think about this change. You try to brush off these thoughts, but they sneak back into your worry queue at the most inopportune times. The feelings are real! A Harvard Business School study reported that 80% of remote workers don’t want to return to the office full time. Human Resource practitioners and managers should prepare for a range of employee feelings about returning to the office. Encouraging open dialogue and flexibility will support a successful transition.

Management will observe a variety of responses to a call for employees to return to the workplace: excitement, fear, stress, and anticipation. For example, new employees who have not met colleagues face-to-face may be enthusiastic about “starting over” in person. Relationships are essential to career development and those new to the organization may be looking to cement them in person. On the other hand, many individuals learned they preferred a virtual work environment. Reasons for this home-based preference include more flexibility, increased time with family and friends, and a higher degree of concentration without office interruptions.

The first thing leaders in the workplace can do is encourage dialogue with employees about this change. These may be tough and somewhat uncomfortable conversations for employees to initiate. “No news is good news” is not an appropriate mantra for this transition. Avoiding this topic with your direct reports is an invitation for them to seek counsel elsewhere. Instead, ask employees what is on their minds. The coronavirus pandemic is a unique scenario for all, and managers would be wise to listen to questions and concerns. A good manager will advocate for employees and be reasonable when asked for manageable exceptions.

Furthermore, it is important to understand your company’s stance on returning to the office. Many companies have changed policies in response to the past year. For example, some companies are offering full time remote work as a permanent option moving forward, an exciting proposition for employees who found this arrangement simpatico with their lifestyle. On the other extreme, some organizations are taking a hard stance, requiring all employees to return to work full time in the office. Regardless of your company’s position, be prepared to share information about safety protocols.

There is no doubt that change is hard – even welcome changes that may bring employees closer to the normalcy of years past. Remember that you may feel differently than your staff. Be patient with them as they process dealing with another change in a seemingly endless stream of unknowns.

Critics of unlimited paid time off (PTO) policies often believe this flexible approach will create havoc across the company; employees will take advantage of this generous benefit and it will be difficult to get work completed as a result. The research suggests otherwise. The results of a study conducted by Namely showed employees with discretionary vacation end up taking less time on average than those with a traditional policy. This hesitancy may be a byproduct of the uncertainty around what is a “fair” number of days to take without seeming overzealous. Or the low usage may stem from time off being less valued in an “always on” culture where you are expected to respond quickly and jump on client calls no matter the day of the week. In short, employees tend to not be the ones upsetting the vacation apple cart. Companies considering a change to this unlimited approach should look at two key resources to determine if they are prepared to support a change of this caliber: the time off policy and employee performance goals.

An “unlimited” PTO benefit works best when guidelines, instructions and restrictions are in place ahead of time. As a best practice, companies should outline details of the policy in writing. A well-defined policy will include details such as coordination of benefits between related policies, including short-term and long-term disability. It will also include instructions on what criteria must be met for an employee’s time off request to be approved. Will requests be denied if multiple employees ask for time off on the same day as a client event or deliverable? How much advance notice is needed for time off requests to be considered? And most important, what specific performance targets must be met?