2024 blogs

Labor unions have long played a key role in shaping the way employees work and are treated. On the positive side, unions often help secure better pay, safer conditions, and stronger job protections. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2021) reports that workers in unions tend to earn higher wages than those who are not. Unions also give employees a unified voice, making it easier for them to negotiate fair terms with their employers.

Still, there are downsides. Unions can reduce a company’s flexibility, since employers must follow strict rules and procedures. These limits can lead to higher labor costs and make it harder for businesses to compete. Some workers dislike the idea of paying union dues, while others worry that union leaders might not always act in the members’ best interest. Critics also argue that rigid union structures can slow down decision making, causing frustration for both workers and managers.

After talking to a family friend who has been in a union for years, I learned that they felt protected and supported, especially during tough times like layoffs or disputes. But they also mentioned that slow negotiations and internal conflicts within the union were frustrating.

Comparing this to what I learned in class and through research, my main takeaway is that joining a union isn’t automatically good or bad. It really depends on the situation. If I felt my workplace treated me unfairly, I might lean toward joining. But if my employer already offered fair wages, respect, and open communication, I might not feel the need for a union. In the end, the decision rests on what you value and the conditions of your specific workplace.

After taking the Life Stress Inventory, Coping and Stress Management Skills Test, and Type A Personality Survey, I’ve gained valuable insights into my stress management tendencies and their potential impacts on my health and professional life. The results revealed a moderate reliance on problem focused coping strategies, scoring 62 out of 100. This indicates I often try to tackle stress head-on, addressing problems by finding solutions. While this approach is effective for controllable stressors, it can become counterproductive when dealing with uncontrollable situations. Recognizing when to let go of what I can’t change is an area for improvement. My impatience and irritability score of 47 suggests a balance between warmth and frustration in my interactions. However, it highlights moments where stress can lead to frustration, affecting relationships and possibly long-term health. Studies have linked traits like hostility and impatience to increased risks of heart disease, underscoring the importance of mindfulness and emotional regulation.

As I advance in my career, particularly as a foreman and entrepreneur, effective stress management is essential. I plan to adopt mindfulness practices such as daily meditation or breathing exercises to remain present and reduce emotional reactivity. Physical activity, especially through my CrossFit coaching and personal fitness routines, will continue to be a cornerstone of my stress relief. Additionally, setting clear boundaries to ensure work-life balance by limiting work hours and prioritizing personal time will be critical.

Organizations today recognize the importance of employee well-being in fostering productivity and retention. Many companies are implementing flexible work schedules that allow employees to balance personal and professional responsibilities. They are also offering wellness programs that include mental health support, fitness incentives, and stress management workshops.

Compensation plays a pivotal role in shaping career decisions, often serving as a key motivator in whether individuals accept a job offer, stay with their current employer, or leave for new opportunities. While financial incentives are crucial, the true impact of compensation extends beyond the paycheck, encompassing benefits, job security, and personal satisfaction.

A colleague of mine recently faced such a decision when offered a higher-paying position at a competing construction company. At first glance, the additional salary seemed like an obvious reason to switch. However, after weighing the pros and cons, they decided to stay with their current employer. The total compensation package including health benefits, retirement contributions, and a positive work culture far outweighed the allure of a higher base salary.

This decision highlights an important truth. Compensation is not just about the numbers. For many, factors like a sense of job security, alignment with organizational values, and opportunities for growth can be just as motivating as the paycheck itself.  They knew the higher salary came with uncertainties, like longer hours and less flexibility. 

This example underscores that while financial compensation is a key driver, it is rarely the only consideration. Organizations aiming to retain talent should view compensation holistically, recognizing the importance of benefits, culture, and long-term opportunities. At the same time, individuals must evaluate how different forms of compensation align with their goals and values.

Ultimately, compensation is not just about making a living, it’s about creating a fulfilling and sustainable career. Recognizing this balance can lead to better decisions, for both employees and employers alike.

Reflecting on my training experiences, I found the CrossFit Level 2 course highly beneficial, while the MEWP/aerial lift supervisor/trainer certification felt less useful, especially after recently completing OSHA 30. These two experiences highlight important principles of effective training, as discussed in this week’s lectures.

The CrossFit Level 2 course offered hands-on skill development that directly improved my coaching abilities. It built on foundational skills, with real-time feedback, practical exercises, and a strong focus on communication, movement correction, and cueing. This aligns well with the ADDIE training design model, which emphasizes analyzing participant needs, setting clear objectives, and using hands-on methods for skill transfer ​(W6 Lecture 1 – Training…). The course was structured to ensure that participants valued the experience, learned applicable skills, and could immediately use them in practice—key components of effective training according to Kirkpatrick’s evaluation model ​(W6 Lecture 2 – Evaluation).

In contrast, the MEWP/aerial lift supervisor/trainer certification felt repetitive. Since I’ve completed it multiple times, it lacked new content or depth to further my knowledge, particularly after the OSHA 30 course, which covered much of the same material. This didn’t align with the concept of adapting training to participants’ skill levels, which was covered in our onboarding and socialization lecture​(W6 Lecture 3 – Onboarding). More advanced content or safety techniques would have made this training more valuable and aligned with what I needed in my current role.

In summary, the CrossFit course stood out for its tailored, hands-on approach, and clear skill transfer, making it immediately useful. The MEWP certification, on the other hand, underscored the importance of evolving content to avoid redundancy. This comparison emphasizes how effective training is not just about covering content but ensuring that it grows with the participant’s level and meets real-world needs. 

Taking the Implicit Attitude Test (IAT) was an eye-opening experience for me, especially as a CrossFit coach who works with people of all shapes, sizes, and fitness levels. My results showed a moderate preference for thin people over fat people, revealing a subconscious bias that surprised me. As someone who believes everyone has the potential to better themselves, regardless of body type, I hadn’t consciously recognized this bias. The results align with broader trends from Project Implicit’s Weight IAT data, where 31% of respondents showed a strong preference for thin people, 28% had a moderate preference, and only 9% demonstrated any preference for fat people. This data highlights how prevalent these biases are, even among those of us who strive to treat people equitably. It also suggests that such biases can easily influence settings like hiring, where fairness and objectivity are essential.

Reflecting on this, I see how implicit bias could undermine the reliability and validity of selection processes, especially in recruitment. If hiring managers, myself included, unconsciously favor certain groups over others, it could lead to skewed assessments and cause qualified candidates to be overlooked. These biases can hinder diversity and reduce the variety of perspectives within an organization. As I’ve learned in this course, such biases are common but difficult to address without intentional strategies.

To reduce the influence of implicit bias, I believe structured interviews can be a valuable tool. By asking standardized questions to all candidates, companies can focus on objective qualifications rather than subjective impressions. Implicit bias training can also help raise awareness and encourage fairer evaluations. Another effective strategy is blind recruitment, where identifiable information is removed from résumés to prevent bias at the initial stages. By implementing these measures, we can foster a more inclusive environment and ensure a fairer hiring process. Recognizing and addressing implicit bias is essential for creating workplaces where everyone has an equal opportunity to succeed, much like the inclusive community I strive to build in my CrossFit coaching.

Reflecting on my past interview experiences, I noticed distinct aspects that made some interviews effective and others ineffective. Effective interviews often had a structured approach, where standardized questions helped in fairly evaluating each candidate. This structure aligns with what the readings emphasize about enhancing interview reliability and validity by ensuring that each candidate is assessed on comparable grounds, reducing bias and enhancing decision quality​(W5 Lecture 4)​(W5 Lecture 3).

In less effective interviews, the lack of structure led to inconsistent assessments and occasional bias. For example, one interview I experienced seemed unstructured, with the interviewer asking only a few generic questions. This unstructured approach often lacks validity because it doesn’t consistently assess the specific skills or qualities related to job performance​(Outline – Selection). Furthermore, without a scoring guide or benchmark answers, it was hard for the interviewer to make objective comparisons. This impacted the interview’s utility, as it became challenging to gauge my fit accurately for the role, which led to a prolonged hiring process and eventual turnover issues.

If I could go back and advise these employers, I would recommend structuring the interview process more rigorously. Developing clear, job-relevant questions based on a thorough job analysis would improve validity and ensure the interview covers essential knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics needed for the role​(W5 Lecture 2). Additionally, using a scoring rubric could reduce subjective bias and improve reliability, helping interviewers make consistent and justifiable hiring decisions. Finally, I’d advise conducting post-interview reviews and scoring each candidate against predetermined benchmarks to enhance the interview’s utility in selecting candidates likely to succeed long-term​(Outline – Recruitment).

Developing and maintaining job descriptions is essential for organizational success, but it comes with its own set of challenges. Based on my experience working at Allen and Laporte. I’ve observed several obstacles related to both the creation and absence of job descriptions. Our company specializes in commercial metal buildings and works in different manufacturing plants around Albany and Corvallis, Oregon.

A key part of developing job descriptions is conducting a thorough job analysis. This process involves identifying the tasks, duties, and responsibilities of each role, as well as the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics needed to perform the job successfully. Job analysis forms the foundation for developing job descriptions and other HR functions, including recruitment, training, and performance management. In a dynamic industry like construction, where we work on various projects across different locations, conducting an accurate job analysis is vital to ensure each role is clearly defined. However, it’s also time-consuming and requires collaboration between management, employees, and sometimes even outside experts.

Once job descriptions are developed through a thorough job analysis, maintaining them is equally challenging. The construction industry is continuously evolving, with new technologies and methods regularly introduced. As roles change with these advancements, so must their descriptions to remain relevant and effective. This requires regular updates and a structured review process. 

Not having clear job descriptions in place can lead to bigger problems. Employees may lack a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities, which can result in miscommunication, inefficiencies. In a fast-paced environment like ours, having reactive workforce planning instead of proactive planning can impacts long-term productivity. 

To overcome these challenges, companies like ours need to commit to regular job analysis and updates. Involving employee feedback ensures the job descriptions reflect the real-world demands of the role. As a foreman, I believe incorporating technology and HR tools can streamline this process. By keeping job descriptions current through regular job analysis, we can improve communication, align employee performance with company goals, and enhance overall efficiency on our job sites.

The companies I selected were Edward Jones (#7), Publix (#39), Wegmans Food Markets (#3), and Power Home Remodeling (#50) they have consistently been recognized for their excellent HR practices.

Edward Jones excels in fostering a culture of inclusivity and trust, with a focus on professional development and continuous learning. By creating an environment of belonging and openness, Edward Jones supports both employee engagement and innovation, reflecting concepts in talent management and employee retention strategies.

Publix is known for promoting from within and investing in its employees’ development, a practice that resonates with HR’s role in career pathing and talent management. Their approach encourages loyalty and long-term retention, which connects directly with the human resource strategies that emphasize internal mobility and the development of future leaders.

Wegmans Food Markets is celebrated for its family-like work environment and its strong focus on employee well-being. Their HR strategy includes generous benefits and support for work-life balance.

Power Home Remodeling fosters a high-performance culture, emphasizing employee recognition and a shared vision for success. The company’s focus on clear communication and continuous feedback. Regular feedback and recognition are crucial for maintaining high levels of motivation and performance.

As a future manager, I aspire to lead with empathy, transparency, and a focus on personal development. HR functions such as performance management, employee engagement, and continuous learning will be key in creating a supportive, motivating environment. I aim to establish open communication channels and foster a culture where employees feel valued and heard, much like the practices at Wegmans and Edward Jones. The most challenging aspects will likely be balancing individual needs with organizational goals and maintaining motivation across diverse teams.

Welcome to blogs.oregonstate.edu. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!