As the economic recovery slogs on without a significant change in employment, some HR experts and recruiters are advocating a push in hiring as a way to reduce poverty and homelessness. Instead of awaiting the perfect candidate, businesses can hire the next best person and provide training to bring them up to speed. Companies with one full time opening could hire one-and-a-half workers. Extend and reach a little, and change a life—or two.

Why? As one former recruiter says, there is a value in simply employing people. To give them hope, while keeping families intact and off the street. Illustrating the reality of family life for a large number of Americans today, is a recent 60 Minutes piece, following up on a story done a year ago about the large number of homeless kids in central Florida. Having lost their homes through eviction or foreclosure, many were then living with their families in motels. One year later, some of these same families are now living in their cars.

The story featured parents who once enjoyed full-time jobs and were able to support their families. Now, they’ve been out of work for months or years. Friends and family can no longer offer their extra rooms and couches, and the families have nowhere to go. Kids get ready for school in the morning in gas station or convenience store bathrooms. School systems hire homeless child specialists to help kids deal with the many problems associated with sleeping and living in cars.

If you’re an employer, are you in a position to hire someone and lift him or her out of poverty? Could you make a lasting difference in a family’s life by giving them the means to put a real roof (not a car roof) over their heads?

If you don’t need any workers, you can still strengthen your community. Why not donate a scholarship in your business’s name to your local technical or community college? Giving a student in need the chance to obtain an education is a life-changing act. Programs offered at these schools typically teach the skills most needed by local industry.

Imagine what would happen if 25% of the businesses in America each hired one worker. With approximately 6 million firms with employees in this country, that’s 1.5 million new jobs. While it might be a nice idea that goes nowhere, it’s worth thinking about—especially at this time of year.

A 2007 lawsuit that accused Bloomberg L.P. of routinely discriminating against pregnant women and mothers was dismissed by a judge in Manhattan. The U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska said that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) failed to provide sufficient evidence that Bloomberg engaged in a “pattern or practice” of discrimination.

The lawsuit alleged that Bloomberg reduced pay for pregnant women or women who recently returned from maternity leave; demoted them; excluded them from management or subjected them to stereotypes about female caregivers in violation of U.S. law.

While allowing some individual claims to proceed in the case, the judge rejected the EEOC’s claim based on a lack of statistical evidence of discrimination. “Here, much of the evidence appears to be the EEOC’s claims that individuals were unhappy with the amount of a rise or unhappy with a denial of a transfer or unhappy about not receiving a promotion,” she said.

Further, the judge acknowledged that individuals who spend more time away from work will face more challenges in terms of advancing, especially in a “company like Bloomberg, which explicitly makes all-out dedication its expectation.” Essentially, the decision to make family a priority over work comes with consequences for anyone—not just pregnant women and mothers.

A Bloomberg spokesman said that the ruling confirms what the company has known all along: that the evidence would be on the company’s side and that the case is without merit.

A recent case in Baltimore MD illustrates the importance of screening employees—every employee. An account clerk who worked in the Baltimore County Office of Budget and Finance faces charges related to credit card theft. While unrelated to her job, the charges certainly demonstrate her willingness to use other people’s money to pay for personal expenses.

Her position is one of fiscal responsibility in a public service, taxpayer-funded department. And while it appears that so far, no customer or county funds have been involved, the employee, who has a court history of financial trouble, had been working there while under investigation for credit card theft—until police came to arrest her at her desk.

The employee was hired in December of 2008 to work in the purchasing department, despite a long history of financial and fraudulent misbehavior. She had faced charges for fraud and writing bad checks. She was sued by the state of Maryland and—just months before her hire date—the very same county office for which she was hired.

The recent case involved a person who reported his wallet and credit cards had been stolen. The investigation led to the county employee. She allegedly told investigators she “has major money issues” and is “late on my bills and needs whatever money she can come across.”

What level of trust is being created by the management team of the Baltimore County Office of Budget and Finance? Especially among the people who pay its salaries? Would you hire someone you sued just a few months before? Did they run a pre-employment background and credit check on this person, and hire her anyway? Or was there no check of her civil and criminal history?

This case leaves many unanswered questions, but does perfectly illustrate that knowing who you’re hiring, before you hire, is the best way to protect your business and even your customers from potential losses. Thorough, professional pre-employment credit checks and background checks are an easy way to gain peace of mind. And in the case of Baltimore County, it might have helped them avoid looking completely inept!

A volunteer firefighter in Vermont was recently denied a workers’ compensation claim for an injury he suffered while at the station. He wasn’t in the line of duty at the time, according to the insurance company, because he was fixing insulation—not fighting fires.

While on a ladder performing the repairs, Jason Stech fell, fracturing his ankle, breaking his foot and shattering his heel. His injuries require surgery and will keep him from working at his paying job for four months. Although he submitted a workers’ compensation claim, it was denied by the insurance company, based on Vermont’s definition of “line of duty,” which is limited to when a firefighter is responding to a fire, drill or test, participating in a parade or fundraising.

In Vermont, where more than 90% of fire departments are volunteer, the decision could send a negative message and hurt volunteer recruitment efforts, some say. Stech says he’ll keep serving his community, but will be more cautious about what he’s willing to do. In the meantime, he’s hiring an attorney and appealing the decision.

Does it make sense that a volunteer firefighter would likely be covered for breaking an ankle while walking in a parade, but not while fixing insulation? Stech assumed he’d be covered for any injuries suffered while doing anything related to the fire department, which seems reasonable enough. Perhaps this firefighter’s willingness to take on the fight will result in a change in the law that will benefit all volunteer firefighters, who deserve more consistent coverage.

A recent report ranked Fortune 500 employers by the percentage of workers they have over age 50. RetirementJobs.com gathered data from public records and surveys of employers and employees, to illustrate for job seekers 50+ which industries tend to employ a disproportionately high or low percentage of mature workers.

The results show that the airline industry employs the most workers over age 50, and that American Airlines was first in the nation, with nearly 40% of its workforce over age 50.  Toward the other end of the scale is Google, Inc., with just 13 % of workers over 50.

RetirementJobs.com stated that the study did not provide insight into whether employers are committed to hiring older workers, or whether they do or do not appreciate older workers. They further said that a low percentage of older workers does not imply that the company is a bad place for older people to work—they just have fewer than would be expected and may therefore be less accepting of older workers.

Additional findings from the study:

• The average among the Fortune 500 is 25.6% of employees age 50+.
• Companies addressing high turnover rates strategically recruit mature employees, because age 50+ workers turn over at one-third the rate of younger peers.
• In any given organization, the percentage of employees age 50+ ranges from 6% to 39% on average.

The top Industries for the number of workers over 50 are:

1. Airlines
2. Utilities
3. Insurance
4. Retail
5. Chemicals
6. Aerospace & Defense
7. Packaging & Containers
8. Forest & Paper Products
9. Food Production
10. Beverages

The Top 10 Fortune 500 Employers Of Older Workers

1. American Airlines                              39%
2. Eastman Kodak                                  38%
3. TravelCenters of America                 38%
4. Delta Air Lines                                   37%
5. United Air Lines                                 37%
6. Weyerhaeuser                                     36%
7. Edison International                          36%
8. Northeast Utilities                              36%
9. United Services Automobile Assn.   35%
10. KeyCorp                                                35%

The Bottom 10 Fortune 500 Employers For Older Worker

1. Consol Energy 14%
2. Nordstrom                                              14%
3. Chesapeake Energy                                14%
4. Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold   14%
5. Electronic Arts                                       13%
6. Google, Inc.                                             12%
7. C.H. Robinson Worldwide                    12%
8. Goldman Sachs Group                           11%
9. Auto-Owners Insurance                          9%
10. AECOM Technology                                 6%

Also appearing in the bottom 20 are companies such as Target, Whole Foods, Best Buy, Hershey, Polo Ralph Lauren, Amazon and Philip Morris.

In a case that will result in significant changes to laws covering employee benefits, the Supreme Court this week ruled in Amara v. Cigna. The case was brought on behalf of 25,000 Cigna employees who disagreed with the company’s handling of changes in its pension plan back in 1998. The employees claimed that the company misled them that a new plan, which actually froze pensions of older, retired workers was “an overall improvement in retirement benefits.”

The Supreme Court ruled that a lower court could award the employees the benefit Cigna led them to believe they had coming. Viewing the ruling as a victory for employees, the assistant secretary of labor at the U.S. Department of Labor’s Employee Benefits Security Administration, which filed a brief on behalf of the Cigna employees, said the court’s decision “goes a long way toward restoring…common fairness.”

Analysts say employers scored a win, too. In the same case, the court agreed with Cigna that when there are conflicts between documents employers give to employees (“summary document”), and those not seen by the employees (“plan document”), employees do not have grounds to sue to enforce the terms of the summary document.

The lower court had ruled that Cigna deliberately provided misleading information to employees and successfully concealed the pension freeze, depriving employees from taking action, such as protesting or seeking employment elsewhere. Cigna argued that employees were legally entitled only to the less-generous benefits described in the formal plan document, which they did not see. Justice Stephen Breyer wrote, “It is not difficult to imagine how the failure to provide proper summary information, in violation of the statute, injured employees.”

Cigna employees could receive an estimated $70 million in pension benefits.

Federal jobs numbers show that employers are adding jobs again. That’s great news for the millions of Americans who are still out of work. If you’re gearing up to make someone’s day by offering them a job, don’t go too fast and skip the background check before you make the final offer. Doing so leaves your company open to loss of time and money and possible lawsuits.

Even if the candidate looks great on paper, and even if they interviewed better than anyone you’ve ever met, you still don’t know this person. 46% of job seekers lied on their applications, according to ADP’s 2009 Hiring Index. That’s nearly half—so if you’ve had ten applicants for a position, chances are at least four of them lied on their resume or application. The only question is: which four?

Of course, if a candidate isn’t outright lying about their credentials or experience, they may still be less than honest. Perhaps they didn’t quite finish that master’s degree. Or, they worked at the national retailer for a year and a half—not the two years the resume indicates. These tiny details might not seem like dishonesty in the eyes of the candidate. So what else doesn’t qualify as dishonesty? Taking home a stapler? Clocking in before they actually start working? Calling in sick when they’re going surfing? You get the idea.

Running a thorough background check, including driving record, criminal history and credit check will give you a more complete picture of a candidate than they will reveal through an interview. If you have company vehicles, do you really want someone with five speeding tickets behind the wheel? And if your employees have access to any amount of cash, don’t you want to be sure you’re not hiring someone who has written bad checks or been convicted of theft in the past?

While checking references is a great idea, former employers won’t always give you anything more than the dates of employment and salary. They usually aren’t willing to give the reason for separation, for fear of reprisal.

Take the next step and order a pre-employment background check. Protecting your business, customers and entire staff is your responsibility when hiring. While you can’t prevent every possible scenario from occurring, you’ll sleep better at night knowing that every candidate you make a job offer to has checked out to your satisfaction. It’s well worth the short investment of time!

Now that March Madness is over, some business owners are reconsidering their policies on the activity surrounding the tournament in the workplace. The innocent office basketball pool can become a dangerous game. And if money is changing hands, it could be even more so–because gambling is not legal everywhere!

A recent survey by CareerBuider indicated that 20 percent of workers have participated in March Madness pools at work. Other reports mention the billions of dollars in lost productivity to business that the March Madness Tournament “inspires.” Maybe your employees are included in those 20 percent and you see a loss in productivity. And maybe you’re fine with that. On the other hand, maybe your office has a more formal atmosphere and you prefer to keep it that way.

So what should your answer be when your employees come to you and ask for permission to start a March Madness office pool next year? Here are some points to consider:

• Will it harm your company to have a once-a-year office pool? If the only thing in the way is you, maybe it’s time to rethink your reasons for saying, “no.”
• Can trust your staff to keep the party to a minimum and still get the job done?
• Avoid online activity, as online betting laws can easily be broken.
• As the business owner, it might be a good idea for you to avoid any involvement in the pool.
• Think about the boost in morale that a March Madness pool could create. Sometimes, hard-working teams need a way to blow off steam and just enjoy their co-workers and the time they spend at work.
• Focus on the amount of work your staff is producing—not necessarily the amount of time they’re spending on their tasks.
• Remember, it’s been a tough couple of years, and your employees might just need a fun break.

Your employees are your most important resource. Think carefully before you take away their March Madness pool!

Hiring a new employee? Whether you’ve been through the process many times—or never before, you might be surprised at “what’s out there.” A more-casual approach to life might spill over to the job interview process for many of your candidates. Some might attribute the following behaviors to nerves, youth or any number of excuses; savvy hiring managers know that these actions can be excellent predictors of future behavior.

Five Signs You’re Wasting Your Time on a Potential Employee

She Arrives to the Interview Late: Traffic, wardrobe malfunctions, child issues, whatever! A conscientious candidate has already driven the route to your office, knows how long it will take and knows where he or she is going to park. They chose their interview outfit days ahead of time and absolutely have child care for such an important meeting. Being late indicates that your time is not as valuable as theirs—and never will be.

He Parks Rudely: Grabbing a spot before another person can get it, or parking where the “employee of the month” is supposed to be, shows either complete ignorance or basic rudeness. A conscientious candidate parks as far away from the building as is feasible, leaving the closer spots for you and your employees.

He Disregards Your Employees: Talking down to the receptionist, not holding the door for those behind him, and exhibits of bad manners could mean that the candidate is not someone you’d want to work beside every day.

She Hasn’t Turned Off Her Phone: There are few excuses for being so unorganized that you forget to turn off your phone before a job interview. But even worse is the candidate who answers it when it rings.

He Uses Foul Language: Letting an “F-bomb” slip indicates the speaker either has no filters, considers you a friend, or uses an offensive term so often that he cannot stop himself. In any case, unless yours is a business that encourages such language, it should be the kiss of death for the candidate.

If you’re new to managing employees, it can be a daunting task—especially if you haven’t been formally trained in employee relations. Much of being a great boss is basic, common sense. Try basing your approach on these tips while you continue to learn how to be a better leader and employee manager.

Here are 5 Ways to Be a Great Boss:

1. Show Your Passion: If you’re not enthusiastic about your company, why would your employees be? Passion is contagious—spread it around and you’ll be the leader that your staff wants to follow.
2. Be Respectful: Remember the Golden Rule? Treat your employees with respect, and they will do the same. Show them your loyalty and support. Say “thank you”more than you think you need to.
3. Look for People Who Balance Your Personality: This trick ensures a team that is well-matched for any challenge, with a variety of strengths and personal characteristics that complement each other. Too many employees who are just like you leaves the organization with all its talents (and weaknesses) in the same area.
4. Recognize Achievement: Don’t let an employee’s outstanding effort stay just between the two of you. Public praise is a sure way to encourage everyone to do their best. Almost everyone loves to be recognized by their boss0—especially in front of their peers.
5. Don’t Expect Perfection: You won’t get it. Motivating your staff to perform is your job, but if you think you can motivate them to perfection, you’re wrong. They are human. They have other interests besides work. Maybe they won’t work as many hours as you do; perhaps they aren’t as smart or talented as you would like them to be. But as long as they are performing as well as you need them to, that should suffice. Expecting them to be human (and acting like one yourself) will go a long way toward creating a strong an loyal team.