Employer Branding: Time to sit up and take notice

/in , /by

It’s hard to believe just a few years ago, the concept of an employer brand was little more than another recruitment buzz word.  Fast forward to today, and employer branding is proving to be a real game-changer in terms of attracting and retaining top talent.

Employer branding is now a permanent fixture on the agenda for not only HR and recruitment specialists, but the C-Suite is also sitting up and taking notice.

LinkedIn’s 2015 Global Recruiting Trends Report has revealed over half of Global Talent Leaders see building their employer brand as a top priority this year.

A further 75% say their employer brand has a significant impact on their ability to hire great talent.

It’s no surprise employer branding has become a major concern for business leaders.  With shrinking talent pools and competitive labour markets occurring in industries across the globe, future-thinking organisations have been working on employer branding strategies for years.

Google is widely regarded as one of the world’s best workplaces and this year was ranked No. 1 for the sixth time on Fortune’s Great Places to Work list.  Google leverages their workplace perks and strong culture to create an employer brand that sets them apart as an employer of choice not only in their field, but in the broader jobs market.

Closer to home, Australian software giant Atlassian, famous for its unique management style  and commitment to rewarding and recognising employees was last year named Australia’s top employer in BRW’s Great Places to Work List.

Cultivating a strategic employer brand is integral in positioning your organisation as an employer of choice, and making your Employee Value Proposition (EVP) stand out among increasingly competitive employee benefits, working conditions and corporate culture.

A strong employer brand shapes the perceptions key candidate demographics have of your organisation and what it’s like to work there.  It communicates your offering in terms of opportunities for career progression, investment in training and education and on-the-job support.

Organisations with a strong employer brand and the EVP to go with it benefit from higher quality candidates drawn from a diverse talent pool, in addition to increased employee engagement and better retention.  Time and money spent on the recruitment process are also slashed, as top talent is more readily attracted to roles with an organisation with a great employer brand.

Employment Office works in partnership with our customers to develop compelling Employee Value Propositions and build strong employer brands. We are specialists in getting the inside message out about why your organisation is a great place to work.

Contact Employment Office today to discuss how we can help position you as an employer of choice for top talent.

Do working Mums make better employees?

/in /by

We all know mothers are great at multi-tasking, but how do they stack up in the productivity stakes compared to their childless colleagues?

A recent study released by the Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis revealed that over the course of a 30 year career, mothers outperformed women without children at almost every stage of their working lives.

Interestingly, mothers with at least two kids were the most productive employees of all.

The study found mothers of babies and toddlers were 15-17% less productive than their childless colleagues, however despite this temporary dip, mothers were still more productive over the course of their careers.

Employment Office Managing Director Tudor Marsden-Huggins says it’s no surprise employers are starting to realise the value in hiring mothers.

“There has been a definite shift towards mothers becoming a highly regarded candidate demographic in the last few years.  Employers see how great working mothers are at getting work done well in a short space of time.  They are also very resourceful and know how to keep a cool head in a crisis.  Becoming a parent provides a wealth of life experience,” he said.

Domestically, a report prepared by Ernst and Young for the Workplace Gender Equality Agency found women in flexible roles (part-time, contract or casual), largely made up by mothers, are the most productive members of the Australian workforce.

Women in flexible roles only waste 11.1% of their working hours, compared to an average of 14.5% for the rest of the working population.

In an average year, these women effectively deliver an extra week and a half of productive work, simply by using their time more wisely.

Based on these figures, Australian and New Zealand businesses could save at least $1.4billion on wasted wages by employing more productive employees in flexible roles.

Marsden-Huggins says employers need to be adaptable if they want to position themselves as an employer of choice for working Mums, implementing flexible working hours or working from home options where possible.

“The relationship between a working mother and her employer is a two way street.  There will inevitably be days when a Mum needs to leave early to pick up a sick child or attend the school sports day.  But in the vast majority of cases, if an employer is flexible in their approach with not only working Mums, but parents in general, the benefits they receive in terms of employee loyalty, dedication and engagement far outweigh the investment in flexibility,” he said.

Should employers adopt a no smoking recruitment policy?

/in /by

We may have left the days of smoking in the office far behind, but tobacco users still abound in Australian workplaces, taking breaks throughout the day to keep cravings at bay.

Organisations across the country are cracking down on tobacco users, with some even considering placing restrictions on hiring smoking candidates.

Restricting the recruitment of smokers has become a trending topic over the last week, following the World Health Organisation (WHO) declaring they will no longer hire candidates who smoke, or reject assistance to stop smoking.

The measures aren’t surprising considering the organisation’s hard line on tobacco use, however the ban on recruiting steadfast smokers has upped the ante in terms of smoke-free workplace policy.

As the United Nation’s Public Health Arm, WHO defends its recruitment policy, reiterating that an estimated 5.4 million people die from tobacco use every year.

Their policy on non-recruitment of smokers states that WHO “is at the forefront of the global campaign to curb the tobacco epidemic. The organisation has a responsibility to ensure this is reflected in all its work, including in its recruitment practices and in the image projected by the Organisation and its staff members.”

WHO’s recruitment process includes a series of screening questions including whether the candidate is a smoker, and if they would continue to smoke if they were employed by the organisation. If the answer to both questions is yes, the candidate will not progress to the next round for consideration.

So we know the World Health Organisation’s stance, but is it possible for Australian employers to determine smokers need not apply for roles in their businesses?

The major issue is whether precluding a candidate from the recruitment process amounts to discrimination.  So far, this argument hasn’t been settled in Australia. In the US, courts have determined not hiring a candidate based on their smoking habit is not discriminatory and is well within an employer’s rights.

The issue is yet to be tested in Australia, and currently no legislation exists to prohibit employers from excluding smokers from their workforce.

While a smoke-free workforce might be a new concept, the smoke-free workplace is not.  Employers have largely adopted non-smoking workspaces, and providing employees with access to smoking termination support is on the rise.

Designated smoking areas are being pushed further and further away from office buildings and managers are cracking down on designated break times.

And when you consider the figures it’s easy to understand why an employer would prefer to have non-smoking employees.  Statistics show the average Australian smoker takes two more days off per year than a non-smoker and, while at work, loses up to an hour out of each day on smoke breaks.  This lost productivity translates to an $800 million dent in the Australian economy.

For now, organisations wishing to advertise for ‘non-smokers only’ are free to do so, but they should know they will be eliminating a tenth of the talent pool straight off the bat, and in an increasingly tight labour market, that’s a large slice of candidates to rule out.