Public Policy & Workplace Training

[T]hrough the social sector a modern developed society can again create responsible and achieving citizenship, and can again give individuals–especially knowledge workers–a sphere in which they can make a difference in society and re-create community. – Peter Drucker

Last week I attended the American Society for Association Executives’ Global Summit on Social Responsibility. Aside from having the opportunity to check out the new National Harbor across the Potomac River in Prince George’s County, it was an amazing event in which attendees – including a significant number joining virtually – collaborated to identify ways the association world could help solve the “complex economic, social and environmental problems while simultaneously creating healthier organizations.” Using his Appreciative Inquiry model David Cooperrider, Professor of Social Entrepreneurship at Case Western Reserve University, ably facilitated the conference.

The Global Summit had five objectives, including “Making the Business Case for Social Responsibility” and “Generating Guiding Social Responsibility Principles for Associations,” the two objectives I found the most interesting. Lately I’ve been reading about how corporations can contribute to global betterment and at the same time improve their bottom line. This makes sense to me: for too long corporations have been perceived – rightly or wrongly – as not caring about the environment, poor people, and other social issues. Corporate social responsibility encourages organizations to identify ways to strategically target a social problem that simultaneously allows them to expand market share. For example PowerUP: Bridging the Digital Divide, a nonprofit affiliated with AOL Time Warner, provided computers and online content to children living in poor communities. This strategy filled a huge need – ensuring that kids in underserved communities had access to computers and educational tools – and also helped AOL Time Warner identify new markets.
  
The idea of having ASAE convene the conference was to encourage associations to embrace a new role in the emerging dialogue on social responsibility, because the U.S. government – Congress and the Administration alike – has become so polarized. Because associations are nonpartisan, and reflect a tremendous variety of industries, they are better positioned to work together on common goals that will provide benefits for all of society. 

Does this sound Utopian? Admittedly, I was skeptical, but Dr. Cooperrider deserves tremendous credit for ensuring that teams stayed on track – not an easy thing to do with about 800 people – and produced some tangible results. Besides continuing work on goals set at the summit, I’m thinking about ways to expand on the good that workplace learning and performance professionals already do. WLP professionals represent every sector, most organizations, reflect Dr. Drucker’s “knowledge worker,” and may already be spearheading efforts on social responsibility. If you are working on a socially responsible initiative I’d like to hear from you.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Tags: Social responsibility, Global competitiveness, learning professionals, International, economy // Add Comment »

Check out our recent post about the federal Green Jobs Act on the T+D Blog. 

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Tags: job training, workforce investment act // Add Comment »

In a Washington Post op-ed last week, columnist David Ignatius criticized the three major presidential candidates for offering what he believes are unrealistic solutions to the nation’s problems. On the economy, Ignatius suggests the candidates are focusing on the wrong things, writing:

“A more honest pitch would focus on the competitive realities of the global economy — and the need for the government to help workers get the training and job skills they will need.” 

To be fair, the candidates are talking about workforce development, at least on some level. Back in March, we wrote about Hillary Clinton’s detailed proposals for job training programs, which included a significant expansion of adjustment assistance and the creation of portable training accounts for workers. John McCain announced his economic plan in an April 15th speech, and called for the creation of flexible training accounts for dislocated workers. Obama has also endorsed training accounts, and he’s promised to increase spending for federal training programs, particularly for green jobs. So it’s not as if the candidates aren’t talking about this issue.

But I think Ignatius is arguing that workforce development can’t simply be a throwaway line in paragraph 33 of a major economic speech. The “competitive realities of the global economy” are that the successful organizations—and individuals, and countries—will be the ones that recognize the value of learning and make the right investments in human capital. This means that our training policy needs to be much a part of the public debate as our tax policy or trade policy.

Determining which learning investments make the most sense—and who should make those investments—demands careful consideration and debate. What better forum to begin this conversation than a presidential campaign?

We’d love to hear your thoughts on this issue; please post your comments below.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Tags: 2008 Campaign, job training, economy, workforce development // Add Comment »

One of the hottest topics in the workplace learning and performance profession is the question of how the baby boom generation will exit the workforce over the next twenty years. Will older workers retire in droves, or will they choose to continue working? Businesses that rely on their skills and knowledge are nervously waiting to see what happens.

The U.S. government has also been looking at this issue, as we documented in this December 2007 T+D article, but a recent report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) suggests that the nation’s public workforce system may not be fully prepared to meet the needs of older workers or their potential employers.

The federal Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA) required states to offer a broad range of federal employment and training programs at single locations, called one-stop career centers (you can read a list of required programs on page 10 of the GAO report). The idea was to make it easier for job seekers and employers to access these services by putting them all under one roof. Unfortunately, just because the programs are physically housed together doesn’t mean they always talk to each other: the programs are still funded from different pots of money, and in many cases one-stop staffers are employed by a variety of different federal, state, or local agencies.

This potential for disconnect led the U.S. Department of Labor, which administers WIA programs, to issue a protocol for serving older workers several years ago. The document provides a series of recommended actions for stakeholders throughout the public workforce system, including one-stops. The problem: according to the GAO report, none of the eleven one-stops they interviewed has implemented the protocol, and less than half of the officials GAO interviewed were either “familiar” or “vaguely familiar” with the document.

None of this is to suggest that one-stops aren’t helping older workers, or that they haven’t developed their own strategies for addressing the needs of this population; the GAO report indicates that they’re trying a number of different service approaches, many of which are proving successful. And DOL is certainly doing their part—they were the lead agency on the Taskforce on the Aging of the American Workforce, which released its findings in February, and they’re engaged in other efforts to expand our understanding of the mature workforce. But given that the first baby boomers started collecting their Social Security benefits this year, the demand for employment and training services may soon strain the capacity of the WIA system, which could lead to reduced opportunities both for older workers and organizations.

We’d be interested in your thoughts on this report, or on the issue of older workers in general. Please click below to post a comment.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Tags: federal agencies, job training, workforce investment act // Add Comment »

Earlier this week I wrote about the “Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2007” introduced by Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA), which would expand education and job training benefits for veterans. There’s a fascinating article  in Thursday’s Washington Post about the pressure from veterans groups on Arizona senator (and presumptive Republican presidential nominee) John McCain, whose support for the bill is seen as crucial to its success. McCain has yet to indicate either support or opposition to Webb’s legislation, which now has 55 sponsors, including the two remaining Democratic candidates.

From a political standpoint, this would seem to be a no-brainer. The original GI Bill offered millions of veterans the opportunity to pursue an education, and a strong case can be made that this investment in human capital was one of the key drivers to America’s economic ascendency in the second half of the 20th century. And given the sacrifices they’ve made on behalf of our nation, who could oppose giving the same opportunities to the brave men and women currently serving in our armed forces? Well, according to the article, the answer is…our armed forces:

“[I]t is not the price tag that gives Defense Department officials pause. It is the fear that a generous education benefit would persuade soldiers and Marines ending their tours to pursue an education rather than reenlist in the overstretched military.”

It’s easy to forget sometimes that the military branches are like any other employers, competing for talent in the labor market. Whether their fears about losing personnel are accurate—Webb argues that his bill could actually boost enlistment levels—it’s understandable that they’d be a little lukewarm about legislation that might impact employee retention.

What are your thoughts about this issue? Write in and let us know.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Tags: 2008 Campaign, job training, education, congress // Add Comment »

There have been a few minor developments in Washington over the last two weeks, so here’s a quick overview and some links:
 
Trade Adjustment Assistance

Last week I blogged about President Bush’s decision to send the Colombian free trade agreement to Congress, and suggested that this decision might lead to negotiations for reauthorization of the federal trade adjustment assistance (TAA) program. It now seems that this is no longer possible: the House of Representatives voted last Thursday to suspend rules that would have required Congress to vote on the pact within 90 legislative days, and the president yesterday declared the trade deal dead.

H-1B Visas

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) conducted two computer lotteries on Monday to determine who will receive H-1B visas for Fiscal Year (FY) 2009. H-1B visas permit U.S.-based employers to hire highly skilled foreign workers for up to six years. Over 160,000 applications were received for 85,000 available slots.

The H-1B program is somewhat controversial. The increased demand for visas has many organizations demanding that the annual cap be raised, and several members of Congress have introduced bills to expand the program. At the same time, some lawmakers are concerned that the program displaces qualified U.S. workers. It’s unlikely that any H-1B legislation will move this year, but look for this to be a hot topic in the near future.

Training and Education Assistance for Veterans

Last Thursday, Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-HI) became the 54th senator to co-sponsor the “Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2007,” which Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) introduced last year. Because Akaka is chair of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, his endorsement provides some momentum for the bill, which may be incorporated in either the supplemental funding bill for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars or the FY2009 defense appropriations bill.

 The legislation would provide expanded job training and educational benefits to certain individuals serving in the armed forces since September 11, 2001, including apprenticeship and on-the-job training, tutorial assistance, and licensure and certification fees in addition to traditional education programs.

On a related note, this Sunday’s Washington Post Magazine carried a nice article about a group called Helmets to Hardhats that helps veterans find apprenticeship and job opportunities in the construction industries.  

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Tags: job training, education, congress // Add Comment »

When the Homeland Security Act passed in 2002, it included a provision establishing the position of “chief human capital officer” at more than twenty federal agencies and departments. Chief human capital officers, or CHCOs, are tasked with driving agency performance through recruitment and development of the federal workforce. The law also established the Chief Human Capital Officers Council (CHCOC), which brings the CHCOs together to advise the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and member agencies on human capital issues and strategies.

The CHCOC just released a new report entitled “Collection of Human Capital Practices,” which compiles some of the best practices in performance management and learning and development. There are case studies and other contributions from a variety of agencies, including (just to give one example) an overview of an ROI study conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to evaluate their leadership development program.
It’s an excellent read for workplace learning and performance professionals, offering great insights on how the federal government is facing up to some unique human capital challenges.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Tags: learning professionals, federal agencies // Add Comment »

Earlier today, the president sent implementing legislation for a Colombia free trade treaty to Congress, setting in motion what may prove a critical sequence of events over the final year of his presidency. Workplace learning and performance professionals should keep an eye on this, as the fate of the Colombia bill may be intertwined with a federal job training program for dislocated workers.

Some background: the Colombia pact was negotiated under the president’s (now-expired) trade promotion or “fast-track” authority, which means that Congress must vote on the bill–without amendment–within 90 legislative days of receiving it from the president. Under the current calendar, that would mean that Congress would have to make a decision on the bill by September, right before they recess for the November elections.

It’s unclear what the president hopes to gain in initiating this showdown. Public opinion on free trade is somewhat negative at the moment: this recent Fortune Magazine poll found that 41% of respondents thought free trade agreements hurt the U.S. economy, while only 24% thought these agreements were helpful.  Congressional Democrats would appear to face little political risk in rejecting the treaty, but they may be willing to strike a deal if it means expanding the social safety net for workers impacted by globalization.

The House passed legislation in October to reauthorize the federal trade adjustment assistance (TAA) program, which currently provides job training, income support, and health care benefits for manufacturing workers dislocated by foreign trade. The House bill expands the program to include service and public sector workers; a similar bill has been introduced in the Senate by Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT). The White House threatened to veto the House bill when it passed, but key congressional Democrats have since signaled that TAA must be reauthorized before any trade deals are considered. The president seemed to acknowledge the need for negotiation, saying:

“The economic effects of expanding trade in goods and services are overwhelmingly positive, but trade can also have a negative impact for some of our citizens. In those cases, government has a responsibility to help workers obtain the skills they need to successfully reenter the workforce. My administration is actively engaged in discussions on legislation to improve and reauthorize Trade Adjustment Assistance program. We’re committed to advancing those discussions as quickly as possible.”

Will the two sides come together to make a deal happen? Given recent history, the odds are probably still against it. But there’s clearly some bargaining room around these issues, and it’s possible that we may see some movement between now and September. We’ll keep you posted on any developments.

How do you feel about free trade and/or trade adjustment assistance? Write in and let us know where you stand.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Tags: job training, congress // Add Comment »

ASTD’s Public Policy Council is a consortium of senior learning executives who advise ASTD on issues impacting the workplace learning and performance profession. It’s a distinguished and accomplished group, and lately they’re getting some media attention.

Last month, Jeanette Harrison, Vice President of the American Express Learning Network and chair of the policy council, was profiled for the cover story of CLO Magazine. The article describes how Jeanette implemented training solutions to develop an award-winning customer service workforce, and provides some insights on her learning philosophy.

Last week, the Wall Street Journal ran an article entitled “How to Tap Government Grants for Training and Development,” featuring an interview with C. Michael Ferraro, President and CEO of Training Solutions, Inc. The article addresses ways for small businesses to locate and apply for government training assistance, and Michael offers five great tips on how WLP professionals and others can engage the public workforce system. A modified version of Michael’s checklist was included on page 16 of the June 2007 Infoline “Use Public Tools for Career Success.”

Both articles are excellent examples of how learning professionals add value to organizations and why it’s beneficial to the workplace learning community to be engaged in public policies affecting the profession.

(Addendum on 4/9/08: The Wall Street Journal maintains an entrepreneurship blog, Independent Street; the author of the training grant article, Simona Covel, posted a piece on Sunday about a manufacturing company that’s been using grants to support their employee development efforts. You can read the post here.)

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Tags: learning professionals, workforce development // Add Comment »

John Hollon writes the always interesting “Business of Management” blog at workforce.com. His March 26th post was about this New York Times article, which addresses the rise of the “green collar” job movement. Hollon says he’s a little skeptical:

“I like the idea of green-collar jobs, but I am leery of the hype and political baggage that seems to permeate The New York Times story.  This may be a great new workforce trend, but I am not convinced. Green-collar jobs sound like something from a Dr. Seuss story.”

Neither Hollon nor the author of the Times article mentions that, far from being a mere idea or trend, green collar jobs are now actually part of federal law. A provision of the omnibus energy bill (H.R.6) that the president signed last December created a $125 million energy efficiency and clean energy worker training program as part of the federal workforce investment system. The language was drawn from a bill, the Green Jobs Act, which was introduced in June 2007 by Rep. Hilda Solis (D-CA); you can read the text of the original bill and a Congressional Research Service summary here.

I am also a little skeptical, but for slightly different reasons. The Green Jobs Act amends the Workforce Investment Act (WIA), which expired five years ago but has continued to operate because Congress continues to fund programs under the law. Neither Congress nor the administration has shown much affection for WIA of late: President Bush called for dramatic funding cuts in his Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 budget request, and Congress actually approved a $250 million rescission in overall WIA funding for FY2008 during the same week that they passed the energy bill.

This means that while there’s enthusiasm for the green jobs training program, at least for the time being, there’s obviously less energy around workforce development as a whole. And that might mean that when Congress actually gets around to appropriating funds for the program, it will be at a level far lower than the $125 million authorized. 

It’s also a bit disappointing that the Green Jobs Act had to be tucked into an energy bill rather than established as part of a comprehensive national workforce strategy.

Write in and let us know your thoughts on “green collar” jobs. Also, check out this September 2007 T+D Magazine cover story on training a green workforce.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Tags: job training, workforce investment act, congress // 1 Comment »