Canadian HR Reporter

CANADIAN HR REPORTER May 29, 2017 18 INSIGHT ONE BURGER, PLUS A SIDE OF BENEFITS TORONTO — Emma's Coun- try Kitchen is adding an optional three-per-cent surcharge to all bills in an eff ort to cover the costs of a new employee benefi ts program. Heather Mee, co-owner of the To- ronto restaurant, said they decided on a levy rather than raising menu prices in order to be "very trans- parent and accountable," accord- ing to the CBC. e business will add about 43 cents to the average bill, which customers can refuse to pay. e surcharge won't cover the costs of the program, which Mee vows will proceed as of June 1, regardless of how many people pay the surcharge. Staff seemed thrilled about the news, citing how rare it is to have benefi ts coverage in the service industry. But not ev- eryone is raising a toast: Some ex- perts expect tips will now go down, and they argue higher prices would have been a better move to help the restaurant's workers. FREQUENT 'PIE-ER' MILES PERTH, AUSTRALIA — The CEO of Qantas Airways, Alan Joyce, proved he was no cream puff earlier this month, keeping his cool after a man smeared a cream pie in his face during a business breakfast. Joyce was speaking at the event in Perth when a man in a business suit walked onto the stage, reached around to rub the pie in his face and calmly walked away, according to Reuters. Joyce later told report- ers he had been unable to identify what fl avour of pie he had been hit with. "My issue is I need a good dry cleaner before I leave Perth, so if you have one, please recommend it to me," he said. WATCHING PAINT NOT CATCH FIRE BERLIN — In the history of boon- doggles, the Berlin Brandenburg Airport holds a hallowed spot. It was supposed to open in 2012, at a cost of two billion euros (C$3 bil- lion). Five years past due, it has yet to open, costs have exceeded 8.5 billion euros (C$12.7 billion) and only 82 per cent of "milestones (to opening) have been achieved." But none of that is why it made the cut for Weird Workplace. No, that honour goes to this revelation — courtesy of News.Com.Au. e departure hall has a futuristic fi re safety system that has been a mas- sive headache. After a disastrous test that saw alarms fail to go off and pipes designed to suck the smoke out nearly implode, an in- novative solution was proposed: Forego the system and hire 800 low-paid staff to be stationed throughout the terminal. Their one and only job: Spot fi res. Not surprisingly, the idea was quickly snuff ed out. SPELLCHECK DOESN'T SOLVE EVERYTHING SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA — Most of us run our documents through spellcheck before handing them to the bosses, but it is not a pana- cea. Airbus found this out when it reported, in its 2016 fi nancial accounts, that it was being inves- tigated by authorities in Australia for off ences such as bribery and fraud. In fact, Austrian authorities were the ones leading the charge, according to Reuters. e typo is the latest in a series of mix-ups be- tween the two similarly named but culturally distinct and geographi- cally distinct countries. CNN was mocked by Twitter users last year for reporting Australia was build- ing a fence on its Slovenian border. And in 2014, the United Nations secretary general off ered his grati- tude to hosts in Australia when he spoke at a conference in Vienna. A spokesperson for Airbus was unable to say whether his com- pany planned to fi le a new set of accounts with regulators, without the geographical gaff e. W EIRD ORKPLACE THE Vol. 30 No. 10 – May 29, 2017 PUBLISHED BY Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd. One Corporate Plaza 2075 Kennedy Rd. Toronto, ON M1T 3V4 ©Copyright 2017 by Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd. All rights reserved. CANADIAN HR REPORTER is published 21 times a year. Publications Mail – Agreement # 40065782 Registration # 9496 – ISSN 0838-228X Director, Media Solutions, Canada: Karen Lorimer - (416) 649-9411 karen.lorimer@thomsonreuters.com EDITORIAL Publisher/Editor in Chief: Todd Humber - (416) 298-5196 todd.humber@thomsonreuters.com Editor/Supervisor: Sarah Dobson - (416) 649-7896 sarah.dobson@thomsonreuters.com News Editor Marcel Vander Wier - (416) 649-7837 marcel.vanderwier@thomsonreuters.com Employment Law Editor: Jeffrey R. Smith - (416) 649-7881 jeffrey.r.smith@thomsonreuters.com Labour Relations News Editor: John Dujay - (416) 298-5129 john.dujay@thomsonreuters.com Web/IT Co-ordinator: Mina Patel - (416) 649-7879 mina.patel@thomsonreuters.com ADVERTISING Sales Manager: Paul Burton - (416) 649-9928 paul.burton@thomsonreuters.com Production Co-ordinator: Pamela Menezes - (416) 649-9298 pamela.menezes@thomsonreuters.com MARKETING AND CIRCULATION Marketing & Audience Development Manager: Robert Symes - (416) 649-9551 rob.symes@thomsonreuters.com Marketing Co-ordinator: Keith Fulford - (416) 649-9585 keith.fulford@thomsonreuters.com PRODUCTION Manager, Media Production: Lisa Drummond - (416) 649-9415 lisa.drummond@thomsonreuters.com Art Director: Dave Escuadro SUBSCRIPTIONS Annual subscription: $175 (plus GST) GST#: 897 176 350 RT To subscribe, call one of the customer service numbers listed below or visit www.hrreporter.com. Address changes and returns: Send changes and undeliverable Canadian addresses to: SUBSCRIBER SERVICES Canadian HR Reporter One Corporate Plaza 2075 Kennedy Rd. Toronto, ON M1T 3V4 CUSTOMER SERVICE Call: (416) 609-3800 (Toronto) (800) 387-5164 (outside Toronto) Fax: (416) 298-5082 (Toronto) (877) 750-9041 (outside Toronto) Email: customersupport. legaltaxcanada@tr.com LETTERS TO THE EDITOR todd.humber@thomsonreuters.com CHRR reserves the right to edit for length and clarity. Todd Humber EDitor's Notes Open season on references… fi nally N ame, rank and serial num- ber. According to movie lore, that's all you're sup- posed to utter if captured as a pris- oner of war. But many organizations also ad- opted that credo when it came to something far less dramatic: e reference check. For decades, there has been a debate about how HR professionals and managers should answer questions about past employees. Some employment lawyers have been vocal in their opinion that there is almost zero risk in providing an honest assessment, while others have proff ered risk- averse strategies that say no in- formation should be shared other than confi rming job titles and em- ployment dates. Back in 2003, in one of my fi rst articles written for Canadian HR Reporter, I dove deep into the is- sue of reference checks. "More and more, HR profes- sionals are being frustrated in their eff orts to get information on candidates as organizations adjust policies for fear of the legal ramifi - cations of giving a bad reference," I wrote. Janice Stubbs, who at the time was HR manager at the Town of Orangeville, Ont., was having is- sues getting reference information from previous employers about 30 per cent of the time. She called it "unfortunate if employers can't get information if there is some- one you wouldn't wish on your worst enemy as an employee." Isn't that the entire purpose of a reference check? I've conducted my fair share of reference checks over the years, and I need exactly zero fi ngers to count the number of times I've heard a negative ref- erence: It just hasn't happened. But I'd need the appendages of an octopus to recount the number of glowing references I've heard. Most bosses and HR departments are happy to share the good news, but clam up when it comes to the bad. So you don't exactly need to be a recruiting guru to fi gure out the name, rank and serial number is a thinly disguised plea: "Do not hire this person. You will regret it." at lack of consistency is ex- actly why we need to abandon the bare minimum reference. e reference checker doesn't know if they are being stonewalled be- cause of a well-crafted and univer- sally adhered-to corporate policy, or because the candidate is a total disaster. ey will naturally as- sume the latter. But now, finally, those who advocate providing honest ref- erences have the courts on their side. As Sarah Dobson outlines on the cover of this issue, provid- ing a negative reference does not translate to liability for the previ- ous employer. Adam Papp applied for a posi- tion with the Yukon government. He asked his former employer, Ernest Stokes, to provide a refer- ence, and Stokes agreed. Stokes knew Papp had the technical abilities to do the job, and was prepared to say so. But technical qualifi cations, in this era of sound HR are but one piece of the puzzle. When ques- tioned about Papp's relational skills, Stokes gave a bluntly hon- est, refreshing response. Let's be frank: at's the entire point of the background check, to uncover unseen issues that might lead to problems down the road. So the Yukon government pulled the job off er, and Papp sued his former employer for nearly $800,000 in damages — and lost. ere is no question those re- marks by Stokes were defamatory and no question they led to Papp not getting the job. However, the statements were "substantially true." Here's some- thing else you may not have con- sidered — the words published in the context of a reference check fall within the range of qualifi ed privilege. at's not carte blanche to unjustly trash a former employ- ee you don't like, but make truth- ful comments without malice and you're on pretty fi rm ground. Questions to ask When it comes to HR, we all know consistency is critical. Many hiring managers are left to their own devices to select can- didates, conduct interviews and even, in some cases, do the back- ground checks. Over the years, we've asked the types of questions HR professionals recommend when probing references. Here's a sampling for your, well, reference: •Describe the position held. •What was the candidate's length of service? •What was the relationship of the reference to the candidate (su- pervisor, co-worker, colleague or direct report) and how long did they work together? •Describe the candidate's techni- cal skills related to this role. •What was the candidate's biggest strength? •What was the candidate's biggest weakness? •Describe the candidate's com- mitment to the business. •Was the candidate punctual? •Was the candidate clean, tidy and professional? •Was the candidate pleasant and professional in her conduct and mannerisms? •Did the candidate get along with peers and subordinates? •Describe the candidate's past performance. •Why did the candidate leave the organization? •Would you rehire this person? •What advice would you give a prospective employer about this candidate? Credit: Borjaika (Shutterstock) DANISH BREWER PUTS THE 'P' IN PILSNER COPENHAGEN — Here's one job we're really glad we didn't get: Urine collector. A Danish brewery drained 50,000 litres of urine from a massive music festival and is planning on producing a novelty beer aimed at the more adventurous drinker. e beer is named — wait for it — "Pisner." It contains no human waste but is produced from fi elds of malting barley fertilized with human urine, rather than traditional animal manure or factory-made plant nutrients. e urine produced enough barley to brew about 60,000 bottles of pilsner beer. And we're not done with the puns. Denmark's Agriculture and Food Coun- cil, which came up with the idea, has already named the concept. It calls it "beercycling." — Here's one job we're really glad we didn't get: Urine collector. A Danish brewery drained 50,000 litres of urine from a massive music festival and is planning on producing a novelty beer aimed at the more adventurous drinker. e beer is named — wait for it — "Pisner." It contains no human waste but is produced from fi elds of malting barley fertilized with human urine, rather than traditional animal manure or factory-made plant nutrients. e urine produced enough barley to brew about 60,000 bottles of pilsner beer. And we're not done with the puns. Denmark's Agriculture and Food Coun- cil, which came up with the idea, has already named the concept. It calls

• Cover