It is very fitting that this should happen around the significant anniversary of the founding Treaty of Rome," said the European Ombudsman, Ms O'Reilly. They showcase the individual and collective efforts to make a positive difference. Since its inception the Network has assisted the EU Decentralised Agencies and Joint Undertakings regarding governance and management of resources, helping them to better deliver the numerous services they offer to EU citizens on legal, technical and scientific matters.
The EU Network was created by the Heads of Agencies to enable a coordinated approach to information exchange and common position agreements. These initiatives seek to add value and visibility, and to find synergies and efficiencies between agencies and to streamline and simplify the operations of the Network at large.
The Network will focus on bringing to fruition joint procurement services between agencies and with the EU institutions, on cooperation and sharing of capabilities in HR and budget matters such as competency management and workforce planning, on digital and cloud services including new approaches in the workplace, as well as developing thematic collaborations between agencies - in scientific and technical activities and communications - always in line with EU priorities.
From December , policy makers, representatives of industry, civil society, EU institutions and public administration gathered at the European Parliament for a major conference dedicated to the work and contribution of the 45 EU Agencies and Joint Undertakings. Skip to main content. EU Agencies Network. Job Vacancies. Working for you and for your future.
Find more information about the EU Agencies in the interactive map below. Supervising Financial Systems. Providing Security and Defence. Supporting EU Businesses and Innovation. Studies on the cost-effectiveness of the Agencies. Download Brochure. In addition, the economies of scale and savings generated for EU taxpayers by EU Agencies and Joint Undertakings were also highlighted, as it is more effective to perform a task once at EU level rather than repeating it 28 times at Member State level.
Two studies were presented at the Forum. One, commissioned by the European Parliament , looked at the cost would be to citizens and national administrations without seven EU agencies supporting the Single Market. To examine the links between customer service and loyalty, the Customer Contact Council, a division of the Corporate Executive Board, conducted a study of more than 75, people who had interacted over the phone with contact-center representatives or through self-service channels such as the web, voice prompts, chat, and e-mail. We also held hundreds of structured interviews with customer service leaders and their functional counterparts in large companies throughout the world.
During a three-year period, we surveyed more than 75, B2C and B2B customers about their recent service interactions in major non-face-to-face channels, including live phone calls, voice prompts, web, chat, and e-mail. The companies represent dozens of industries, ranging from consumer electronics and packaged goods to banking and travel and leisure, in North America, Europe, South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand. Although our research focused exclusively on contact-center interactions, it makes intuitive sense that the findings apply to face-to-face encounters as well.
Second, acting deliberately on this insight can help improve customer service, reduce customer service costs, and decrease customer churn. According to conventional wisdom, customers are more loyal to firms that go above and beyond. But our research shows that exceeding their expectations during service interactions for example, by offering a refund, a free product, or a free service such as expedited shipping makes customers only marginally more loyal than simply meeting their needs.
For leaders who cut their teeth in the service department, this is an alarming finding. Indeed, 89 of the customer service heads we surveyed said that their main strategy is to exceed expectations. And managers often assume that the more satisfied customers are, the more loyal they will be. But, like others before us most notably Fred Reichheld , we find little relationship between satisfaction and loyalty. The picture gets bleaker still. Although customer service can do little to increase loyalty, it can and typically does do a great deal to undermine it.
Customers are four times more likely to leave a service interaction disloyal than loyal. Another way to think about the sources of customer loyalty is to imagine two pies—one containing things that drive loyalty and the other containing things that drive disloyalty. The loyalty pie consists largely of slices such as product quality and brand; the slice for service is quite small.
But service accounts for most of the disloyalty pie. We buy from a company because it delivers quality products, great value, or a compelling brand. We leave one, more often than not, because it fails to deliver on customer service. Armed with this understanding, we can fundamentally change the emphasis of customer service interactions. Framing the service challenge in terms of making it easy for the customer can be highly illuminating, even liberating, especially for companies that have been struggling to delight. Simply: Remove obstacles. We identified several recurring complaints about service interactions, including three that focus specifically on customer effort.
Customers resent having to contact the company repeatedly or be transferred to get an issue resolved, having to repeat information, and having to switch from one service channel to another for instance, needing to call after trying unsuccessfully to solve a problem through the website.
Well over half the customers we surveyed reported encountering difficulties of this sort. Companies can reduce these types of effort and measure the effects with a new metric, the Customer Effort Score CES , which assigns ratings from 1 to 5, with 5 representing very high effort. Not surprisingly, CSAT was a poor predictor.
NPS proved better and has been shown to be a powerful gauge at the company level.
CES outperformed both in customer service interactions. I encourage HR professionals to lead conversations about inclusive hiring at their organizations so other executives can make informed, sensible and beneficial hiring decisions.
Trying Too Hard
The commitment to reduce these barriers to employment produces positive results for individual businesses and the entire nation. If individuals with a criminal record can be considered for employment based on their talent and skills, the benefits for the business — and society — are far-reaching. HR professionals are well positioned to provide counsel and generate a tailored set of best-practice principles that will benefit both the business and the individuals seeking a second chance.
Most offenders will not serve life sentences, but do we perpetuate their sentences for life by not hiring them? Gone are the days of blanket policies prohibiting the employment of anyone with a criminal record. And yet, a nationwide study commissioned by the Society for Human Resource Management SHRM and the Charles Koch Institute CKI in found that 82 percent of managers and 67 percent of HR professionals believe that the quality of hire for workers with criminal records is about the same or higher than that of workers without records.
That report also showed some ambivalence about hiring from within this group, with 41 percent of managers and 47 percent of HR professionals unsure how they felt about hiring individuals with criminal records. Their top-rated concerns were about legal liability, customer reactions and regulations that prohibit or make it difficult to hire individuals with records. This disconnect is where Getting Talent Back to Work begins — providing HR professionals with the information and tools needed to confidently evaluate applicant criminal records, reduce legal liability and increase inclusive hiring from this untapped labor pool.
Learn how to update practices to ensure individual assessments of criminal records are relevant. Each year in the United States, nearly , men and women are released from prison and re-enter society, where many want to find jobs. Yet despite the growing need among U. As the nation reaches nearly full employment, business leaders and human resources professionals are considering these previously overlooked populations for the first time as a source for workers. In fact, job applicants with criminal records are proving to be a viable workplace solution for many organizations.
While a great deal of uncertainty about hiring workers with criminal records still exists among some senior executives today, a recent study commissioned by the Society for Human Resource Management SHRM and the Charles Koch Institute CKI finds that employees generally are open to working side-by-side with the formerly incarcerated. While willingness to hire is high, few say their company actively recruits individuals with criminal records. Just 5 percent of managers and 3 percent of HR professionals report this type of recruitment.
- Secondary Navigation?
- About the Toolkit.
- Executive Summary.
This is consistent across organizations of different types and sizes. Companies are understandably concerned about the safety of their workers and customers as well as their own assets and public image. But today, many HR professionals are finding that the best approach to hiring individuals with criminal backgrounds is not so different from the one they use for everyone else: to evaluate each candidate on his or her merits. They have an especially strong incentive to deliver value because they've seen the alternative, and in the overwhelming majority of cases, they deliver.
This toolkit can be used by any employer to get talent back to work … today. It provides the information, guidance and tools needed to hire confidently from this untapped labor pool and make an impact. Not everyone with a criminal record is a career criminal. Many people with a record have made a single mistake, and for millions, that mistake was possession of marijuana or driving under the influence. For others, it was shoplifting, passing a bad check or having an argument turn into a fight.
When such crimes are not habitual the individual is often more vigilant in remaining on the right side of the law. Many employers have had very positive results from giving people with records a second chance.
Stop Trying to Delight Your Customers
Johns Hopkins Medicine has hired hundreds of people with records, many for critical jobs involving patient care. When it conducted a multiyear audit of accidents and other major negative events involving employees, it found that not even one had been caused by an employee with a record. This is not unusual. Other employers have reported that people with records often are so grateful for a chance that they are the most dedicated employees in the company and among those with the best retention rates.
Employers who use criminal records in their hiring decisions need to be aware of applicable federal and state laws. Legal compliance with these laws is key when considering formerly incarcerated applicants for hire. Although federal law does not explicitly protect applicants from discrimination based on their criminal records, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of does protect against discrimination based on race and ethnicity.
A violation may also occur when an employer treats criminal history information differently for different applicants or employees, based on their race or national origin disparate treatment liability. Managing Equal Employment Opportunity How to Conduct Compliant Criminal Background Investigations Ban the Box Several state laws and local ordinances limit the use of arrest and conviction records by prospective employers.
Even when state laws do not restrict employers from asking about criminal history early in the hiring process, many employers have voluntarily removed the question from their applications and moved such inquiries to the end of the hiring process. Voluntarily banning the box not only sets a tone with applicants and lets them know that fair-chance hiring practices are in place, it also ensures legal compliance as ban-the-box laws continue to spread.
Employers must also comply with state and local laws regarding the use of consumer reports. When do employers need to comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act? Therefore, employers must evaluate prospective providers, known as consumer reporting agencies CRAs , to ensure a quality supplier. Conducting a criminal background check is far more difficult than it may appear, and not all CRAs offer reliable reports. Mistakes by CRAs can result in liability for the employer under the Fair Credit Reporting Act and can lead employers to turn down highly qualified applicants or hire applicants they would not have hired based on an accurate report.
Interviews should be equal and fair assessments, and the basic structure should not vary between candidates. Formerly incarcerated applicants are people—looking to be employed, functioning members of our society, with strengths and weaknesses just like any other candidate. They are frequently the most dedicated and conscientious.
EU Agencies Network
A lot of doors are shut to them, so when someone gives them an opportunity, they make the most of it. Some criminal history may come to light during the interview process, whether volunteered by the applicant or given in response to questions about gaps in his or her employment history. These questions will be part of the individual assessment discussed later in this guide.
During any interview, making a connection with applicants who are more like us is common as we find him or her easy to engage with and feel comfortable around. Employers often assume that a new hire who has spent time behind bars will require extensive training to acquire common workplace skills. According to data from the Department of Justice, however, more than one-third of incarcerated citizens have at least a high school diploma. In order to meet parole requirements, many individuals are regularly drug-tested and closely supervised by their parole offices and have to observe curfews.
In short, these candidates may demonstrate more reliability and accountability than similarly skilled peers in the general population. If not, discrimination claims are an increased risk. A background check is considered a selection test. States may have individual requirements and guidelines for those working in that state. The guidelines state that discriminatory practices exist when a selection test has an adverse impact on the employment opportunities of a race, sex or ethnic group. Adverse impact refers to employment practices that appear neutral but have a discriminatory effect on a protected group.
- To Secure Knowledge.
- HOW LONG LORD? When Heaven Seems Silent.
- Rounds- Memoirs of Financial Success and Calamity?
- What Is Tourism??
- Red Deer: Life Among the Mandans.
As minority men and women are more likely to be incarcerated than their white counterparts, race and ethnicity discrimination could arise when background assessments are conducted without evidence of validity or a basis in job relatedness. Consulting with an attorney before implementing any selection method is advised.
Since the first option can be an arduous task, most employers opt for some version of the second option. This would include the development of a screen and applying it to assess the risk of hiring an applicant for which the employer considers:. The following should be helpful when developing targeted screens that meet the standard of being job related and consistent with business necessity. Describing the nature of the job helps when assessing whether the criminal conduct relates to successful performance on the job and is consistent with business necessity.
This description would include:. An up-to-date job description will be a key component of an accurate assessment. Not all criminal convictions represent serious misconduct. Some offenses, such as disorderly conduct, motor vehicle offenses other than DUI , and public indecency often the result of public urination are minor and of little relevance to employers. Note: Unlike a conviction, an arrest is not reliable evidence that an applicant has committed a crime. Thus, an exclusion based on an arrest record is justified only if the case is still pending, the conduct appears to be job related and relatively recent, and if the employer has reason to believe the applicant or employee engaged in the conduct for which he or she was arrested such as the existence of security-camera footage that has been released to the public.
- Freight Broker Training - Atex Freight Broker Training;
- NAICS: The North American Industry Classification System;
- HACCP Principles & Application Guidelines | FDA?
Additionally, some states may not allow any arrest records to be used in such an assessment. A person with a conviction does not represent a risk forever. The longer someone with a conviction goes without a new conviction, the less likely he or she will commit a new offense. Eventually, the risk becomes comparable to the risk presented by a person with no criminal record. In general, the risk that someone with a record will commit a new offense after five years is only about 1 percent to 2 percent greater than the same risk presented by someone without a record.
The acceptable length of time since the offense is typically set by employer policy.
Related Freight Broker Training: Foundations and Overview - Executive Summary
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved