Case Law review: Employee absconding disciplinary process, see to its procedural conclusion

In this case law review article, we explore a case where a senior employee of a parastatal body was terminated with cause. The employer followed the due process of a  disciplinary hearing after an audit report showed flaws in the procurement process for the core banking system. The employee was given a show cause with fifteen allegations to respond to. A hearing was scheduled but the employee didn’t attend despite being given 4 opportunities including virtually. The employee sued for unfair termination and infringement of the Bill of Rights as per the constitution of Kenya.

Highlights of the case

The claimant sued the respondent for among others, flawed and unreasonable suspension during the disciplinary process, and violation of rights specifically related to fair administrative action and fair labour practices. That all actions regarding the termination were null and void.

The judge ruled in favor of the employer(respondent) as the judge found that the employer had followed due process in the disciplinary process, and gave the claimant(employee) four opportunities to attend the hearing but the employee appeared to disregard the process yet the allegations were grave in nature.

Issues

The issues to be determined were narrowed down to;

• Whether the Respondent violated the Petitioner’s constitutional rights.
• Whether the Petitioner was unlawfully and/or unfairly dismissed.

Judgment Highlights

The judge ruled in favor of the respondent on both issues finding that the claimant’s constitutional rights were not violated on account of the employer as the allegations against the employee were clearly stated, a show cause was issued, the employer allowed the employee to list what they needed to prepare a defense, disciplinary hearing was set, four opportunities to attend were accorded and even virtually as the claimant was taken ill.

The judge also ruled in favor of the respondent that no constitutional rights were violated as the respondent exercised fair labor practices, fair administrative action during the process to give the notice to show cause, a disciplinary hearing scheduled, and accommodation to give access to what the claimant needed to prepare their defense.

Lessons Learnt

This case sought to nullify the termination process as unfair and seek relief in light of constitutional breaches. However, the respondent followed due process. The employer’s process was elaborate and accommodated the claimant’s postponement of the disciplinary process. The respondent was forced to proceed with the hearing without the claimant’s presence as he brought abrupt sick sheets at the 11^th hour and it can be adduced that he was avoiding the disciplinary hearing and using his medical condition as a delaying tactic.

1. Due process

It is a requirement of the Employment Act 2007 Section 41 to notify an employee accused of misconduct of the reason that the employer is considering termination. The employer in this case notified the employee of the fifteen allegations against them that they were to respond to, and a show cause was issued.

Section 44 (3) and (4) further guided on an employee’s right to be heard and representations considered. The employer scheduled a disciplinary hearing with the employee four times with two postponements. The employer followed due process to terminate the employee with cause.

Employers can emulate the procedural nature of the disciplinary process that was accorded to this employee.

2. Fair Administrative Action

Fair Administrative Action is a right for every citizen under Article 47 of the Constitution to expeditious, efficient, lawful, reasonable, and procedurally fair administrative action. The employer procedurally executed the employee’s disciplinary process, going to great lengths to accommodate the employee when he was sick and offering an alternative to a virtual hearing when a physical one proved problematic.

The employer exercised an efficient and lawful process in handling the termination of the employee and employers can learn from this case how to rightfully execute fair administrative

3. Time factor

The employer initiated the show cause process on 22^nd December 2022 and the final hearing was held on 13^th February 2023. This is an average of 8 weeks to bring the disciplinary process to a close despite the postponement of the hearing 4 times. The employer exercised great patience to accommodate the employee to see to the due process.

This is quite commendable for employers to not be in a rush to close disciplinary issues but emphasis ought to be on due process.

Disclaimer: This case study is solely for informational purposes only from case law or information in the public domain. Opinions expressed here are solely of the author.

It is therefore not meant to infringe, interfere, or damage the reputation of the mentioned institutions or parties. It is also in no way meant to influence any ongoing judicial process related to the cases mentioned.

This article may contain only an excerpt of the case law and not in its entirety to bring out an issue in focus.

Source credit: Kisili V Consolidated Bank Kenya Ltd http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/266767/

Case Law Review: Commission Based Compensation could land you in trouble.

In this case law review article, we review disputes between employers and employees that have emanated from commission-based compensation for sales persons in the employment contract.

We explore gaps that led to the claimants (employees) being awarded in favor of their demands for commissions not paid or where there was unfair deduction to the employees for sales not paid for by an employer.

Highlights of the Cases

In case A, an employee resigned from the services of the employer and served two months’ notice as was required of her contractual agreement. During her discharge upon serving her notice, her pay was deducted KES 232,000/= from her final dues.

In their defense, the employer claimed that the money was being recovered for pre-paid commission through post dated cheques. The employer also presented their credit policy that had been communicated to the sales and marketing executives.

In case B, an employee employed as a salesman and was unfairly terminated during his sick leave and was claiming unpaid commissions during his tenure totaling to KES 3,851, 140.38. In their response, the employer claimed that the employee had collected sales revenue from customers but had not remitted the same to the company.

Issues

In case A, the claimant wanted the judge to determine whether they were entitled to recovery of deductions made by the employer in the sum of 232,000/-. It was the employer’s response that the employee had failed to collect the outstanding amount from the customer.

In Case B, the claimant wanted the judge to determine whether he was entitled to various terminal benefits including unpaid commissions. The employer filed a counterclaim that the employee had misused company assets (company car), had collected unremitted sales revenue and was therefore not entitled to the commissions.

Judgement Highlights

In case A,the judge ruled in favor of the claimant as the credit clearance had five levels of check stretching within the sales department, credit control department and senior management. How then did the burden to recover the sale only fall on the employee?

Moreover, the job that was meant to be paid for was not done (the advertisement did not run) and hence why the client did not honor the payment. How then was this the employee’s burden to bear?

In case B, the judge ruled in favor of the claimant on account of providing proof on a balance of probabilities that commissions earned were not paid. It was also the claim for the unpaid commissions by the employee that led to victimization by the employer and ultimately their termination.

Lessons Learnt

From these two cases, we can learn that employment contracts whose compensation is not only a salary but also based on commission need to be managed to ensure commissions due to employees are paid.

Some 5 tips to guide the management of these type of contracts.

1.Give addendums to contracts.

The contractual agreement issued during employment relating to the compensation clause may change from time to time. This particularly pertaining to commission structure, frequency of payment of the commissions and their itemization in relation to the sale they are being paid for. An addendum to contract ought to resolve this, provide clarity to the employee and also be a point of reference where a dispute emerges.

2. Qualify a sale.

It is important to qualify what a sale is in your organization’s context depending on your nature of business. Is a sale based on the number of goods sold or a revenue target? Is it a sale if the revenue from the sale has not been received? This clarity can equally be brought out in the addendum to the contract.

3. Credit Policy

What is your credit policy and how does it affect what is qualified as a sale? Is the commission due on delivery of goods or in the customer honoring their credit period? Who bears the responsibility of this credit policy if the debt remains unpaid by the customer?

4. Justice and Fairness

It is only fair that commissions earned are paid when they are due. It is good practice to honor the commission commitment and not deny the employee what is due to them. Business ethics call for giving the customer what they pay for. It is also only ethical to honor that which you have committed to your employee as they contribute to your business’s success.

5. Itemized pay statement

It is required by law as per Employment Act Section 20 (c) to itemize pay earned by an employee and this also includes commissions. The payroll for sales and marketing executives can not be generalized as that of non-sales staff.

Disclaimer: These case studies are for informational purposes only from case laws or information in the public domain. Opinions expressed here are solely of the author.

They are therefore not meant to infringe, interfere or damage the reputation of the mentioned institutions or parties. It is also in no way meant to influence any ongoing judicial process related to the cases mentioned.

Source credit:

Case A : http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/240574/ – Vera Nkirote Vs Radio Africa Group Ltd

Case B: http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/158098/   – Hudson Kidaha Vs Ramageco kenya Ltd

Case Law review: Terminating on conflict of interest, you bear the burden of proof

In this case law review article, we explore a case where an employee was terminated on allegations of conflict of interest for receiving payment from who the employer alleges to be a supplier. The case boiled down to whether there was substantive and justifiable reason to terminate the employee and whether there was procedural fairness in the employer’s disciplinary hearing process.

Highlights of the case

The claimant sued the respondent for wrongful, unfair and unlawful dismissal of her employment, compensation equivalent to the  residual remainder of her contract and  a declaration that the disciplinary panel were not impartial and consequently null and void.

It was the claimant’s case that she had been terminated unfairly and un-procedurally and the employer had publicized her color photograph through mass media that had led to injury to her character and reputation.

The respondent pled their case that the claimant had been procedurally terminated from the services of the company for breach of the company’s business ethics and values. It was the respondents defense that the claimant was notified of a hearing on allegations of accepting inappropriate payments, the claimant was notified of the disciplinary hearing date, time and venue. The claimant was also notified of the right to be accompanied by a representative and right to present evidence. A hearing was held and an appeal that withheld the first hearings outcome to terminate the respondent.

Issues

The issues to be determined were narrowed down to;

Whether the Respondent has proved that there is justifiable reason to terminate the claimant’s employment

Whether the claimant was accorded procedural fairness prior to being terminated.

Judgment Highlights

The judge ruled in favor of the claimant finding that, the respondent terminated the employment of the claimant from mere allegations that they did not prove to the claimant during the hearing process. The respondent alleged that the claimant had received KES 860,000/- from a party identified as Oshgoh commercial agencies. The claimant claimed to know Joshua Mugo but the respondent laid their claim of linking the claimant to Waveline who was the respondent’s supplier. It was therefore unclear how the respondent’s code of business ethics was broken yet Oshgoh was not a known supplier to the respondent.

The judge also ruled in favor of the claimant on the second issue finding that while the respondent portrayed a procedural disciplinary process, the claimant was only given a day’s notice to attend a disciplinary hearing and could not put together a solid defense within such a short time. Moreover, the claimant was not specifically notified of the allegations against her in the notification to attend the disciplinary hearing but instead only learnt the specific allegations during the hearing.

Lessons Learnt

This case was an unfair termination suit based on justifiable reason for termination on what the employer alleged to be conflict of interest and breach of company code of business ethics and values. The employer may have lost this case on procedural flaw in their disciplinary process, specifically not notifying the employee of the specific allegations against them prior to the hearing, only giving a day from notification of hearing to the actual hearing and not conducting their own investigations. Here are five lessons we can can learn from this case.

1. Notification and hearing(Specific Allegation)

It is a requirement of the Employment Act 2007 Section 41 to notify an employee accused of misconduct  the reason that the employer is considering termination. The employer in this case failed to notify the employer with specificity of the allegations of receiving inappropriate payments. The specific party the money was received from was not known before the hearing. We can therefore learn that specific allegations against an employee are important for the process to be valid as procedurally fair.

2.Reasonable Time ( Notification to Hearing)

In this case, the employee was only given a day from date of notification to the date of hearing. Consequently, the employee was unable to adequately put together a substantive defense. The process was therefore procedurally unfair and constituted unfair termination as the unfair procedure led to the termination.

We can therefore learn that a day is unreasonable for the employee in the disciplinary process.

3.Investigations

The employer ought to have done their own investigations prior to alleging that the employee had received inappropriate payments. During the court proceedings the employer couldn’t connect three parties that they claimed paid their employee. Employers therefore ought to do their own investigations before commencing disciplinary proceedings against an employee. This will aid a justifiable reason for considering termination.

4.Burden of Proof

When an employer terminates an employee on account of misconduct, the burden of proof to show justified and substantive reason for termination lays with the employer. This applies to cases that involve conflict of interest, fraud and sexual harassment. Employers ought to bare this in mind when executing disciplinary procedures that have a high probability of leading to termination.

Disclaimer: This case study is solely for informational purposes only from case law or information in the public domain. Opinions expressed here are solely of the author.

It is therefore not meant to infringe, interfere or damage the reputation of the mentioned institutions or parties. It is also in no way meant to influence any ongoing judicial process related to the cases mentioned.

This article may contain only an excerpt of the case law and not in its entirety to bring out an issue in focus.

Source credit:  http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/241042/  – Beatrice Karwitha Kiragu Vs Nairobi Bottlers Limited

Human Content Moderator Unionization: A Blessing or A Curse?

You may have used a social media or AI platform within the last hour to get news, as a form of entertainment or keep in touch with a loved one. To your delight, this was fast with no buffering delays. What you may not know, there was a human moderator who made sure that the content on your feed was not harmful and met some ethical considerations mandated to social media platforms.

In recent years, the work of human content moderators has become increasingly important as social media platforms have become a primary source of news and communication for many people around the world. This has however come at a price. The toll of this nature of work on the mental health of human content moderators has also become increasingly evident with most reporting Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). These are the people who make sure that a suicide video or a filmed murder doesn’t make it to your feed.

Unionization

On May 1^st 2023, the day that marks the day of the worker, human content moderators serving some of the big technology companies through business processing outsourcing firms symbolically converged in Nairobi and made a resolve to form a union. Their motivation, better pay, better working conditions and better support for mental health due to the harm caused by their nature of work.

Unionization is all good and in line with the workers’ rights and freedoms to associate. Will this be a good move though? On the one hand, the benefits of unionization are apparent.  A union can help to improve the pay for fair pay for equal work and better working conditions with support for mental health support to the hazards presented by the work they execute.

On the other hand, there are potential downsides to unionization. For instance, unions can make it more difficult for companies to adapt to changing market conditions, and innovate as fast as they need to since union rules can limit flexibility in hiring for skill needed to stay competitive. Unions can also create a divisive “us vs. them” mentality that pits workers against management, which can be counterproductive in a fast-moving industry like tech. This could also see the offshoring of this services away from Kenya to South East Asia where the labour market and technological advancements are readily available.

Effects on mental health

Despite these concerns, it’s hard to argue against the need for better working conditions for content moderators. The job can be emotionally taxing and mentally demanding, and many moderators report feeling overwhelmed by the constant stream of disturbing content they are exposed to. There is however something business executing these services can do to improve the working conditions.

For starters, a clear description of the nature of work ought to be clearly stated in the job advert and description for the job holder to be aware and consent to taking up the job. Secondly, assessment centers to evaluate potential mental dexterity of the job holder needs to be executed before placement. Not everyone can do this job. Thirdly, there needs to be mandated weekly mental health while on the job and trauma support while they encounter traumatic content. Fourthly, there needs to be hazard limitation where someone can not execute this role over extended periods of time. All these mental health support initiatives ought to be tracked with monitoring and evaluation so as to know employees who may be in the red as far as their mental health is concerned.

Risks of unionization

The business process outsourcing of human content moderation has presented employment opportunities for Kenyans who have the skills and the labour market has a glut that needs to be absorbed into gainful work for sustainable livelihoods. But are we going to accept just any work to the detriment of the mental health of a young demographic?

While unionization could be beneficial, we risk losing these contracts to other countries with equal human capital and infrastructural capability to compete for the offshoring contracts and ununionized environments where they can adopt and innovate to stay competitive. These contracts however, can not cause long-term harm to those who service them.

Intergenerational Conflict in the Workplace in Kenya: Understanding the Dynamics

As the Kenyan workforce continues to evolve, with more and more young people joining the workforce alongside older employees, intergenerational conflict in the workplace is becoming increasingly common. This is not unique to Kenya, but it is a growing issue that requires attention and understanding.

The conflict arises when employees from different generations hold different values, work styles, and expectations about the workplace. Baby Boomers, for instance, who were born between 1946 and 1964, are typically more hierarchical and value experience and tenure over flexibility and adaptability. On the other hand, Millennials, who were born between 1981 and 1996, tend to value work-life balance, flexibility, and purpose-driven work.

One of the key areas of conflict is around communication styles. Younger employees tend to prefer instant messaging and digital communication, while older employees prefer face-to-face conversations and phone calls. This can create misunderstandings and delays in decision-making, which can negatively impact productivity.

Another area of conflict is around work-life balance. Younger employees value work-life balance and flexible working hours, while older employees often feel that this is a sign of laziness or lack of commitment to the job.

To address these conflicts, employers need to understand the unique strengths and challenges of each generation and create a workplace that is inclusive and supportive of all employees. This can be achieved through mentoring and coaching programs that facilitate intergenerational collaboration and communication. Employers can also implement flexible working hours and work arrangements that cater to the needs of all employees, regardless of their age.

It is also important to recognize the value that each generation brings to the workplace. Younger employees bring fresh ideas and technological savvy, while older employees bring experience and industry knowledge. By recognizing and harnessing the strengths of each generation, employers can create a more productive and harmonious workplace.

In conclusion, intergenerational conflict is a growing issue in the Kenyan workplace. To address this issue, employers need to recognize the unique strengths and challenges of each generation and create a workplace that is inclusive and supportive of all employees. By doing so, employers can harness the strengths of each generation and create a more productive and harmonious workplace.

Case Law review: Changing an Employee’s Job Description? An Employee Must Accept Changes

In this case law review article, we explore a case where the change in roles and responsibilities was not communicated through a job description. The claimant was employed as a personal assistant to the chief strategist and development officer for about 1 year and 6 months when she was terminated on account of poor performance.

Highlights of the case

The claimant sued the respondent for unfair termination as she had served diligently without having received any warning or notice about her work during her employment but was unfairly, unlawfully, and verbally terminated.

The claimant stated that her verbal dismissal was followed up with a written one a day later which cited the reason for termination as poor performance. She also claimed that in addition to her official duties as outlined in her contract, the respondent’s representative would direct her to take care of her children. A role that would lead to her working until the wee hours of the night.

The claimant also requested a job review as she felt her duties were not in line with her job description on numerous occasions and was never accorded one. This and the fact that no performance evaluation was ever executed for her by the respondent, was her case that she was unfairly terminated. She also presented evidence in the form of emails that were about child care- a role she was not hired to execute.

The respondent countered the claimant’s case that they had communicated childcare-related roles and on cross-examination, it emerged that with the communication of  this change in roles and responsibilities, there was no confirmation of acceptance of the additional role. The respondent’s witness could also not confirm if the role of child care was within the role description of an Executive Assistant.

Issues

Among the issues of determination were whether the termination of the complainant was valid both procedurally and substantively and whether the claimant was entitled to the reliefs sought which included,

a). A declaration that the Claimant’s termination of employment was unlawful and unfair;

b). A declaration that the Claimant’s work environment was contrary to the dignity afforded to the Claimant by the Constitution of Kenya;

Judgment Highlights

The judge ruled in favor of the claimant noting that her termination was procedurally and substantively unfair. The job holder was not issued with a job description and it was not clear on what basis the respondent based the poor performance claim on. Moreover, the claimant was not given a fair hearing.

The judge also noted that the respondent’s treatment of the claimant bordered on servitude and was awarded USD 40,000.00 for unfair and unlawful termination.

Lessons Learnt

This case was an unfair termination suit based on poor performance where the claimant was never issued with a job description and was expected to execute roles that she felt were out of the scope of those an executive assistant should do and beyond what was stated in her contract of employment. The respondent claimed to have communicated the additional roles but there was no acceptance of the change by the job holder. Here are four lessons we can learn from this case.

1. Job description particulars are mandatory

It is a requirement of the Employment Act 2007 Section 10 (2c) that a written contract of service shall contain a job description of the employment.

Section 10 (5) further states that any changes on the particulars of the employment contract must be in consultation with the employee and the same communicated to the employee in writing.

Since the basis of the termination was poor performance, the job description forms the fundamentals of any performance evaluation. This was the case that the respondent couldn’t prove.

2. ‘Any other duties assigned’ disclaimer

In the HR practice, most if not all job descriptions will contain this disclaimer at the tail end of the role description as a caveat to protect the employer in terms of the scope of work that can be executed by the job holder to avoid the claim ‘it’s not my job.’

This has however been widely misused to create a broad scope of duties that may be completely unrelated to what a job holder does. It would be good practice to have the disclaimer but with a limit concerning duties executed. This limitation, should be in relation to the job holder is hired to do.

In this particular case, the job holder was an executive assistant but was expected to provide child care for her supervisor which meant she would work until the wee hours of the night. This is highly unethical and the judge noted this bordered servitude. Child care, certainly does not fall under any other duties assigned for an executive assistant.

3. Dignified workplace

The Constitution of Kenya in the bill of rights Section 28 states ‘Every person has inherent dignity and the right to have that dignity respected and protected.’

As employers, we have a duty to provide dignified work and an environment that forsters dignity for employees. The claimant on numerous occasions requested for a job review as she felt that the childcare duties were beyond the scope of an executive assistant. Her request was never honored.

Her childcare duties meant she had to work beyond the normal working hours and out of the scope of what she was hired to do which was to make things easier for her supervisor. This is a form of human indignity as her role description seemed to be intently ambiguous.

4. HR for Non-HR training

This and multiple cases emerging from Employment and labor relations courts are pointing to a gap where non-HR managers may be executing people decisions that are illegal and resulting in claimants being awarded wins by the courts.

There is a need to train non-HR managers on employment-related legislation with case studies emerging from the courts on what reasons led to the employers losing the cases.

This is with the view that non HR managers who manage their employees at departmental level are executing people decisions that expose employers to litigation liability.

Disclaimer: This case study is soley for informational purposes only from case law or information in the public domain. Opinions expressed here are solely of the author.

It is therefore not meant to infringe, interfere or damage the reputation of the mentioned institutions or parties. It is also in no way meant to influence any ongoing judicial process related to the cases mentioned.

This article may contain only an excerpt of the case law and not in its entirety to bring out an issue in focus.

Source credit:  http://kenyalaw.org/caselaw/cases/view/241042/  – Lia Gloria Myaka Vs Bridge International Academies

Are Kenyan Law firms ready for Gen Z?

What started as a rant on a social media platform by a lawyer who found it unreasonable for an intern/ pupil to use a taxi to serve documents to their corporate client within town has started a revolution on how pupils want to be treated during their pupilage training.

The lawyer in a subsequent post however sought to clarify that the destination was close to their office which would not justify the use of a taxi- but it was too late.

Perception Survey on Pupillage experience

Gen Z law interns and pupils- the initiative takers they are- took it upon themselves to try and solve this perennial issue. One of them commissioned a survey to gauge how much the respondents were paid during their pupilage, their experience, and whether they would recommend the pupilage center to another pupil.

The survey attracted more than three hundred respondents and has brought to light the unfavorable working conditions, ill-treatment, underpayment, or none at all that is prevalent in law firms in Kenya pointing to a beckoning change. Are law firms ready?

Striving for Balance, Advocating for Change

 A Deloitte global 2022 Gen Z and millennial survey labeled ‘Striving for balance, advocating for change’ ,  had 14,808 Gen Z respondents from all over the world including Africa. The survey found that 29 % of Gen Z respondents found the cost of living to be a top concern. Financial anxiety is also prevalent with 30% of the Gen Z respondents not feeling financially secure. These findings mirror the demand by the Gen Z pupils and interns who are refusing to work for free. The drive by legal interns and pupils to have paid internships and pupillage is however not new as there has been a wider push in all professions to have internships be paid.

Underutilization of pupils

It is also noteworthy that matters that emanate from the survey go beyond remuneration with complaints of not being allowed to learn or being used for petty errands including, making tea. Pupillage is a requisite to be admitted to the bar, denying the pupil the learning experience is highly unethical of the pupil master.

In the Deloitte study, Gen Zs are not afraid to speak up to ask for change. This further helps build their sense of purpose and belonging within an organization. Work seems to matter for this generation. Not just any work but meaningful work that makes them feel like they are contributing to something that matters.

Intergenerational Conflicts

Intergenerational differences will dominate the world of work in the foreseeable future as Gen X approaches retirement, Gen Y are now taking the helm in organizations and Gen Z are the new entrants in the job market.  It’s imperative that law firms seek to understand this age demographic, what makes them tick, what makes them give their best, and what would be the best approach to retain them.

The pupillage and associates survey also had a high workload adversely mentioned by the fortunate few who were availed of the actual pupillage learning. The Deloitte survey found that 46% (4 in 10) of Gen Z respondents felt burnt out due to the intensity of their workload. The World Health Organization has categorized burnout as a phenomenon resulting from chronic workplace stress. This will pose a big challenge for employers to retain talent.

What can employers do?

Pay interns. This is non-negotiable. At a bare minimum, give a stipend that helps them communicate, buy bundles to relieve some stress on Tik Tok – you are overworking them anyway, and commute to and from work.

Have forums where you can engage the different generations in matters that affect them directly. Listen to their concerns, give feedback about their concerns and implement their feedback. This is vital to foster inclusive decision-making and create an environment that encourages belonging to your organization’s purpose and consequently, loyalty. We all need loyalty to drive an organization to success.

Be flexible to have a blend in working models where Gen Z has the latitude to come to the office when it’s absolutely necessary if your operations allow for a hybrid working model. In the Deloitte study,63% of Gen Z respondents would prefer having a hybrid working arrangement. Law firms- this is an easy one for you to implement.

Put mental health in focus for impactful change. Gen Z has a high prevalence of stress and anxiety. Supporting mental health is no longer a ‘good to have but now ‘a must have’. This will help Gen Z cope and mitigate stress and burnout in the workplace.

Gen Z is not a problematic generation as they may be branded for being audacious and not holding their voice. Organizations should accommodate and adapt as they are trickling into the workforce.

Is your organization ready for a Gen Z workforce?

Credits: The Deloitte 2022 Global Gen Z and Millennial survey

Let’s Call Quiet Quitting what it is – Disengagement.

Quiet quitting is the phenomenon where an employee doesn’t let work take over their life or doesn’t go above and beyond what is in their job description. Simply put, an employee does the bare minimum and can turn down projects that are not of interest to them, will not respond to messages outside working hours, and is less invested in their role.

Some tell-tell signs of quiet quitters include their lack of consistency in their work projects and initiatives, there is limited communication from them on their current projects or what they feel they have little investment in, they lack a sense of belonging in the organization’s value system, and, they do not trust their colleagues or authority within the organization.

All these symptoms are signs of a disengaged employee and the quiet quitting phenomenon is therefore rebranding disengagement. For an organization to thrive, there needs to be constructive communication, a shared sense of belonging toward the organization’s goals, a continued and sustained effort to realize these goals, and a great level of trust with colleagues and leaders driving the achievement of goals and objectives.

Do not get me wrong, no employee should kill themselves for work and as a mental health advocate, work-life balance is paramount. Employees giving the bare minimum, however, has no place in the future of work.

The workplace as we know it has changed. With hybrid and remote jobs at an all-time high. It’s up to organizations to readjust how to keep employees engaged. In the traditional sense of a workplace, you could easily point out an employee who used to be vibrant but has become sullen all of a sudden. Or used to be active in meetings but no longer has strong opinions on issues under discussion. The supervisor could note that they have noticed that they are disengaged recently. This is no longer possible where we do meetings with cameras off now and all you get in terms of feedback- is nothing from my end.

Gallup defines employee engagement as the involvement and enthusiasm of employees in their work and workplace. This means, involvement in tasks and projects, excitement to be involved in the tasks and projects, or merely putting in their time and being willing to be a positive influence on business outcomes.

To get the most out of employees and with Gen Y and Gen Z now dominating the workforce, organizations need to re-adjust the ways of working to meet the expectations of this demographic, flexi-time, remote working, matching workers with jobs that help them fulfill their purpose and help them have a work-life rhythm.

Another key element is to always have an element of employee engagement in the performance reviews to always have a pulse on how engaged or disengaged employees are. This helps make engagement part of the employee life cycle and see what area the organization needs to invest in to have engagement high in the organization.

Ethical Recruiting – It Matters!

Recruiters have been catching a lot of negative flack lately due to how they have been executing recruitment. Some of this negative flack from candidates is warranted. As recruiters, we need to do a whole lot better to not only do right by potential job holders but also protect the brands of the employers we represent.

Ethical recruitment is the execution of the recruitment process with a moral code of right and wrong. Particularly with fairness, transparency, and, honesty. In this article, we explore what recruiters can do to address pertinent issues perennially raised by candidates in the recruitment process

The clarity in the Job Description

The role profile should be exhaustive in what is expected of the role, the desired skills and attributes the job holder should possess, and the indicators of success for the job holder. This is not only ethical but will also ease up your recruitment as job holders can see if the job is something they would be interested to pursue. Go a step further and even state some risks that the job may pose if any.

Empathy

Most recruiters come from a place of power.  These needs fixing. Empathy in recruitment is immersing yourself in the position of a job seeker. If you were the job seeker, would it be ok for you to apply for a job whose responsibility wasn’t so clear?

Would it be ok to be applying for a job whose salary on offer was too meager for you to pursue but you did anyway as you didn’t know how much their budget was?

 Would it be ok for you to go or the interview as scheduled but you ended up spending more than 2 hours waiting?

Would it be ok for you to wait for feedback that is never forthcoming months later?

How would you feel if the panel in the interview only exerted power and made you feel less than?

Put the salary in the job advert!

Provide the salary range you are offering for a position in the job advert. This will potentially half the pool that you will attract for screening. Equally, there is less opportunity to shortchange a job holder based on their previous salary and this also helps build your employer’s brand.

A caution to job seekers though, please don’t apply for a job that is offering below what your expectation is in the hope that you can negotiate up to what you desire. Granted, you can negotiate up but not more than 20%.

Communicate the Recruitment Process

In the interest of transparency and managing candidates’ expectations, communicate what the recruitment process will entail. Do this with a step-by-step articulating timeline for each step. If your first step is to execute an aptitude test, let the candidate know the process and the timelines to expect outcome feedback.

Candidates will appreciate this and decide whether they want to participate or not. A practice that is unethical in this regard is that which candidates are given case studies to do, some are unsuccessful only for the candidates to learn that their ideas in a case study executed during recruitment were adopted and implemented by the organization.

Better yet, go a step further and explain the why for each step to the candidate. This will help you get a better buy-in with the participant, especially with the time commitment communicated too.

Give feedback

Ghosting on a candidate is not it. We are prone to tell candidates at the end of interviews that we will get in touch with them. Do get in touch with them. Telling them of the status of their candidature for the position. Should timelines have been reviewed, say you expected an outcome within two weeks but it is turning out to be a month, communicate to the candidates this fact.

Granted, due to volumes, we rely on technology to communicate regrets. Generic regrets that are of no value to the candidates. Some candidates write back asking for specifics of their failure to qualify. Take the time to provide this to them.

Recruiters need to live and practice ethical recruiting. Be a champion for the candidates we interact with in the recruitment process while protecting employer brands.

Why Your Job Hunt Feels Like a Job

Does your job search feel like a full-time job?

Job hunting can be treacherous and more often than not, the job seeker is desperate and has an ‘anything-goes’ attitude which is in itself detrimental to one’s mental health.

Some factors may be the job seekers’ own doing while others are those beyond their control. In this article, we focus on some factors that a job seeker has a great degree of control.

You are applying for the wrong job

It is advisable to apply for a job that you have at least 75% qualifications for in the required academic and experience expectations of the hirer. If you do not meet this quota, you are doing yourself a disservice and you will feel rejected with every application from which you don’t get feedback.

Job seekers are applying for anything and everything and it is tedious as a recruiter to realize that you may have attracted a large volume of applications but only 20% of this pool is worth screening.

The education system has failed us

Data on the labor market demand versus what Universities and Tertiary institutions are churning out is scanty though there appears to be a great mismatch. This could be the contributing factor to why we have engineers applying for administrative jobs or every third CV I screen is a Purchasing and Supplies graduate.

Job seekers must do their research to know on-demand careers in the foreseeable future and keep upskilling to remain competitive in the medium term of their career.

It’s competitive

The unemployment rate stands at 6.6% of the available workforce according to a Kenya National Bureau of Statistics report in the first quarter of 2021. This coupled with the mismatch of market demand versus available skills, the job market is highly competitive. An average administration job will receive a minimum of 100 applications. What will therefore make you as a potential candidate stand out? Do you have unique skills that an employer is looking for?

You are a victim of technology

Have you ever seen a job description and you could literary tick off every item on the job description but you still got a rejection? It sucks, I know but maybe you were just a victim of impersonal software that is using algorithms to filter what applications that are worth having human interaction with. There are however hacks to it, tailor-making your CV with Key words from the job descriptions for the role being sought. But it needs work as this can not be the generic application you send out. Are you willing to do the work?

Another reason why you can not afford the anything-goes attitude in your job applications but filter and focus on those jobs in which you stand a chance as you check off at least 75% of the requirements.

You are impatient

Job placements take time. And if a company wants to get the right candidate, they will invest the time, and resources to leave nothing to change. On average, this timeframe can range from three months to a year. From screening the applications to testing for skill, interviewing for fit, and background checks, employers want to be as thorough as possible.

Candidates tend to get impatient with the process with persistent and nagging queries about their applications. However,  there is a need for recruiters to communicate the timelines with the candidates and keep candidates abreast with progress as it unfolds.