Dell Spurs Sales by Lending to Hard-Hit Small Businesses

Posted by Shawn McCammon | Business Marketing, Business and Entrepreneur, Uncategorized, small business | Tuesday 30 March 2010 9:04 am

Justin Scheck of the Wall St. Journal writes that “for years, Dell Inc. has relied on sales to small businesses for a big chunk of its revenue. It sells more personal computers to small companies than any tech supplier. Now, it is offering more credit to spur small business purchases.”

He goes on to note that “The financing strategy is showing promise. Its small-and-medium-business division posted a 10% gain in revenue in the company’s fiscal fourth quarter ended Jan. 29 from the same period last year, versus an 11% gain for the company as a whole. Operating-profit rose 17% from the same quarter last year to $282 million, surpassing the $281 million in operating profit from Dell’s large-business unit, which posted an 8.4% rise from last year.”

You can read the entire article here, and check out Dell’s page to see if anything interests you! A market snapshot on Dell here.

Dell Spurs Sales by Lending to Hard-Hit Small Businesses

Details on the new HIRE Act signed by President Obama

Posted by Shawn McCammon | Employment Advice & Counseling, Employment Legislation | Thursday 25 March 2010 11:33 am

President Obama recently signed the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment (HIRE) Act, containing more than $17 Billion in tax credits designed to stimulate employment. The Act also includes $20 Billion for highway and transit infrastructure programs as well. One of the most important provisions for businesses is a tax credit for hiring from the ranks of the unemployed.

Under the Act, when an employer hires a “qualified employee” the employer is excused from paying the normal Social Security match of 6.2% of the wages in 2010. What is a qualified employee you ask? A qualifying employee is one who

  • is hired after Feb. 3, 2010 and before Jan. 1, 2011;
  • is not hired to replace another employee;
  • is not related to the employer;
  • and certifies under penalty of perjury that he or she has not been employed for more than 40 hours during the 60-day period ending on the date that employment begins with the new employer.

This incentive can save the employer over $6,000 annually for each qualified employee that is hired. Under certain circumstances, the employer who hires a new employee, and retains their services for 52 weeks, may also be able to receive an additional tax credit available on the 2011 tax return equal to the lesser of $1,000 or 6.2% of the wages paid to an employee for those 52 weeks.

These tax incentives are meant to spur job creation, especially for small businesses who are undecided about whether to begin to ramp up expansion efforts in light of recent economic challenges.

Here is the press release from the Ways & Means Committee Chair describing this bill.

Details on the new HIRE Act signed by President Obama

You must properly classify those in your workplace (employee v. independent contractors)

Posted by Shawn McCammon | Employment Advice & Counseling, Employment Compliance Wage & Hour | Friday 5 March 2010 9:35 am

I discussed the importance of properly classifying those in your workplace (i.e., employee or independent contractor) in this older post.

Matthew Nelson of Dinsmore & Shohl writes here that UPS just entered into a $12.8 million settlement in a case dealing with the improper classification of their northern California drivers. He writes that “[t]he drivers claimed they were wrongfully classified as independent contractors rather than regular UPS employees, and as a result, were denied the benefits and protections of, among other things, the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). Particularly, the drivers focused on the FLSA’s minimum wage and overtime guarantees.”

The drivers alleged that UPS controlled almost every aspect of the working relationship; including, delivery times for packages, that UPS dictated the drivers’ dispatches, set the prices, and even controlled what the drivers wore. Essentially, the drivers claimed they were such an integral part of UPS’s business, that they could not be said to have any separate or distinct business of their own. The court allowed the case to proceed as a class action, and the group eventually included roughly 2,400 UPS delivery drivers. Mr. Nelson also notes that “UPS denied the allegations, but eventually agreed to settle the case for $12.8 million (the settlement received provisional approval, but must still receive final approval from the court).”

If you are an employer utilizing independent contractors in your business, make sure that the classification is correct and that you aren’t simply postponing liabilities to a later point time.

You must properly classify those in your workplace (employee v. independent contractors)

Employers must consider additional accommodations under ADA & FEHA when an Employee exhausts available statutory leave time

Posted by Shawn McCammon | Employment Advice & Counseling, Employment Leave & Benefits | Tuesday 2 March 2010 1:49 pm

This month, the EEOC and Sears, Roebuck & Co. entered into a court approved settlement agreement in the amount of $6,200,000.00 entitling the 235 impacted employees to over $26,000 each.  The distribution is being carried out pursuant to the terms of a consent decree approved by Federal District Judge Wayne Anderson on September 29, 2009. You can read the EEOC’s press release here.

In its lawsuit against Sears, the EEOC had alleged that Sears maintained an inflexible workers’ compensation leave exhaustion policy and terminated employees instead of providing them with reasonable accommodations for their disabilities, in violation of the ADA.

This large settlement reminds employers that if employees are out on some form of statutory leave, like the workers’ compensation leave at issue in the Sears matter, and the employee exhausts the leave but is still experiencing a medical condition that qualifies under the ADA or California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), the employer must engage in the “interactive process” to determine if a reasonable accommodation (including a possible extension of the employee’s leave) is available and can be provided to the employee without creating an undue hardship on the employer.  Otherwise, strict application of leave policies that result in the termination of an employee who fails to return to work at the exhaustion of such leave may result in significant liability for the employer.

Employers must consider additional accommodations under ADA & FEHA when an Employee exhausts available statutory leave time