Mgmt 361 Hrm Research Project Final Paper

HRM 361 Research Project
Charles F. Day & Associates L.L.C.

        Student Columbia College        

Abstract

Through my assessment of the Human Resource system of Charles F Day and Associates LLC (CFDAY) I have found that in regards to Human Resource Management the company as a whole does a very good job overall.  However, as always if we dig enough there will always be deficiencies that will be found and must be corrected for the company to run at its prime efficiency.  In this report I have noted these deficiencies which I have uncovered, made recommendations on how to correct them, as well as supplied you with resources and links to that should help you with making these corrections. While you review this keep an open mind and be objective as this is only to assist you in making this company the best that it can be.

HRM 361 Research Project
Charles F. Day & Associates L.L.C.

In this paper I will be conducting an assessment of the Human Resource department of Charles F. Day & Associates. I will be looking at all aspects of the HR department, noting deficiencies and making recommendations to the board to correct these deficiencies.

Company Profile

Charles F. Day & Associates was founded in 1995 and is an established provider of program management, life cycle management, logistics, and business improvement services to the Department of Defense. (cfday.net/content, n.d.) CFDay is a family-oriented company, whose owners truly care about their employee’s welfare and families. The company makes a large contribution towards Medical, Dental and Vision employee premiums as well as offers a full benefits package for all full-time employees.  This package includes paid vacation, personal time, holiday pay, Short Term/Long Term Disability, and Life Insurance up to $50,000, at no cost to the employee. There is also a 401(k) plan with discretionary employer matching up to 5%.

CFDay currently has approximately 150 employees, with its headquarters in Davenport Iowa; however employees are scattered across the globe from Iraq and Afghanistan to the United States and Australia. The company’s focus is on Field Artillery, Military Intelligence, logistics as well as Doctrine writing and Training.

Identified Problem Areas

1. Failure to have an updated Employee Handbook, currently not one available for review by employees
2. Incorrect overtime payments
3. Failure to document employee performance issues
4. Failure to renew Security clearances when they come up for renewal
5. Failure to ensure Instructors are ABIC (Army Basic Instructor Course) certified

Consultant Recommendations. 

1. In regards to the Employee handbook, currently through a search of the company portal (https://login.paylocity.com/escher/escher_webui/views/home/WebPay.aspx?) there is no Employee handbook listed.  It is has come to my attention that there was one recently with a date of Jan 2012 however, it was taken down for review and updates. While it is understandable to need to make such updates and or corrections periodically, until a new one is approved and or published the most recent one needs to be available for view of the employees.  If one is not available, how can anyone hold their employees accountable for anything in it?  My recommendation would be to update and or review the employee handbook once a year, and ensure that all employees are briefed on any and all changes formally by their immediate supervisors and have them re-sign that they have read and agree.  Please see and review the following link for an example of an employee handbook if needed.

1. From the time of 01 Sept 2012 until 31 March 2013 there were several employees who were incorrectly overpaid overtime while working overseas in both Afghanistan and Iraq.  This was not due to said employee’s error but rather due to an error in upper management’s ability to read and understand a government contract on two separate occasions. There were 11 employees affected by this error, and the average employee during this time was overpaid an excess of $9000 a month for their services, some totaling 7 months or more.  While this has been proven to be something that the company can legally recoup, it has in many cases put employees in a tough financial bind.  Since most believed this money to be rightfully theirs, many have spent and or invested this money.  It is my recommendation that more than one person in the future read and or approve all contracts bid on before putting out compensation benefits for employees. I further recommend that the companies legal team should also review all said government contracts to ensure full legal compliance prior to hiring and or outsourcing for the personnel to fill these positions.  This should alleviate these types of errors in the future.  Please see following link for clarification on what rules and regulations are for each state regarding recoupment for overpayment.  http://www.shrm.org/legalissues/stateandlocalresources/stateandlocalstatutesandregulations/documents/deductionlaw.pdf
2. In failing to document employee performance issues, many other issues may quickly arise within the organization.  This failure may lead to other employees not caring about how they do their own job if no one ever gets in trouble for what they do or fail to do.  This is a problem which can rapidly spread through an organization and bring it to its knees.  Many time the upper management is completely unaware of any issues and are just left wondering why morale and or efficiency has plummeted. For this reason I recommend that performance issues are dealt with quickly and sufficiently. One way to combat this is to actually implement an employee rating scheme or evaluation system.  Through this, both management and the employee should know where they each stand at all times.  Simply standing up such a system is not enough however, there must be steps followed in this, from initial counseling, to performance counseling through the year culminating in the employees final performance evaluation.  Thorough training of supervisors who will be rating said employees must take place before they can accurately and unbiasedly rate an employee.  This is a process which needs to begin immediately, and you should set a goal to have this system in full swing in the next 90 days.
3. In job listings for the company, a security clearance with at least a level of SECRET is required for the hiring of an employee. This is a requirement based on the Department of Defense’s needs and the scope of work listed in the contract that the company has been awarded by the DOD.  At this time there are 3 current employees whose security clearances have either expired or are within 90 days of expiration. While some contracts may not require a clearance, most do.  In the case that it is not needed, by allowing the employees clearance to expire is doing both an injustice to the company and the employee. The company will not be able to transfer employees without a clearance to a contract in which one is needed without having to start the clearance request procedure from scratch.  This can take up to 12 months to be approved while a renewal normally takes approximately 90 days, furthermore this costs about 4 times what it would if the clearance had only been renewed. In keeping with Government compliance, as well as alleviating any issues in the future I recommend that all security clearances are sent up for renewal at a minimum of 90 days from expiration.  This will ensure that all compliance is kept in regards to all government contracts. The following link will answer most questions regarding security clearances, anything further should be taken up directly with the DOD. http://www.dss.mil/psmo-i/ps_faqs.html
4. Employee training is a concern, regarding having employees who are not currently certified through the Army Basic Instructor Course (ABIC).  Upon new hire orientation all new hires are ensured that if they are not already ABIC certified that they will be as soon as possible in order to remain in compliance with the government contracts.  Currently out of 18 instructors employed, 4 have not attended the Army Basic Instructor Course or the Marine Corps equivalent.  These 4 employees have been with the company for over 18 months now, and need to attend training immediately in order to keep in compliance. My recommendation is to get these 4 employees enrolled immediately in the next ABIC course and at a minimum have them certified within the next 90 days.  Failure to do so may have an adverse effect on the next contract bid with the Department of Defense.

[Heading 5]. 

References

(2013, October 1). Retrieved December 5, 2014, from http://www.shrm.org/legalissues/stateandlocalresources/stateandlocalstatutesandregulations/documents/deductionlaw.pdf