As featured in The Wall Street Journal, Money Magazine, and more!

Search: unemployment

A group of fresh, unemployed lawyers have banded together to sue law schools. 73 alumni have filed at least fifteen class-action lawsuits, alleging the schools inflated employment figures and salary data to attract students and increase rankings. The real goal of the lawsuits seems to be to effect systemic change in the education industry and associations that accredit law schools, like the American Bar Association.

Schools are in the business of generating alumni, and to a great extent, use as many marketing tricks that any company uses in order to influence public opinion. It’s true that a 90% graduate employment rate looks better than a 75% rate on paper, and I’d be more inclined to choose a school with a higher employment rate, with all other factors being equal. But a 90% graduate employment rate doesn’t guarantee that I would receive the job I want after graduation, even if I were in the top 10% of the class.

Furthermore, I’ve come to the conclusion over the years that any statistic used for marketing purposes is subject to manipulation in an attempt to further the goals of marketing. Hard numbers give the impression of fact. From an early age, we’re trained to believe that one plus one equals two, in all circumstances, and numbers are truth. Statistics can be misleading in many ways, and are used more often to try to convince others of a point of view rather than quantify facts in reality.

Law school graduationThe group of lawyers probably can’t prove that the blame for their unemployment situation rests with the law schools. There are many factors that contribute to unemployment, including the overall economy, local job markets, and the effort, skills, and self-marketability of each alumnus. It doesn’t appear as if the former students are suing to have the schools compensate them for the lack of expected income from working, but they are suing to enlighten the public to the issue of misleading statistics throughout the educational industry.

Mutual funds must advertise that “past performance does not guarantee future results.” Even if a graduate employment rate were perfectly measured and accurately reflected exactly what a potential student understood the number to be, a good rate today is no indication that the rate will continue to be high by the time the school awards a degree or certification. If my index mutual fund returned 12% last year and lost 8% this year, I can’t sue the fund manager or the stock market for not providing the dividends I was hoping for. If fraud was involved, it might be a different situation. Perhaps misleading statistics like graduate employment rates are somewhat fraudulent, but I don’t see a parallel as schools do not typically promise that students will be employed at the level they’d like after graduation — and in the case of lawyers, after passing the bar exam.

There might be better ways of raising the issue of misleading statistics in the marketing endeavors in which institutes of education engage. Using the courts to make a point is only one tool that’s available to increase awareness of an issue. When you’re a hammer, though, everything looks like a nail.

Several years ago, while I was completing my Masters in Business Administration degree, I considered attending law school. Ultimately, I decided not to pursue a law degree and to focus my energy on my business instead. I think I made the right decision.

Photo: CubanRefugee
WNYC

{ 15 comments }

During the recession, my employer, a firm in the financial industry, eliminated raises for employees at the Vice President level and above for one year. The company, although continuing to perform well compared to its peers, cut back bonuses and other benefits. It’s easy for employers to demand higher productivity for less compensation when the job market is stagnant and the economy is threatened.

“You’re lucky to have a job” was the prevailing attitude. Many of my co-workers had family members or knew people who were out of work during the recession, and there was a lingering fear that, particularly after some internal consolidation, any of us could be out of our jobs at any time. Some were holding onto their jobs for dear life.

PaycheckThe power balance between employer and employee is always tilted in companies’ favor, but never more than during a period when the economy is falling apart. Unemployment may be at 8.5%, lower than during the height of the recession, but this is still high, and employees are still willing to put up with cutbacks just to keep their jobs.

What appears to be a short-term gain for an employer — reducing expenses in human resources, salaries, and benefits — can be a long-term loss. The recession ushered in a period of New Frugality. Consumers used credit cards less often and companies cut back spending and hoarded cash. The corporate balance sheet was important, and companies appeared stronger by reducing expenses to ensure profits for shareholders. Employees suffered as a result, and the stagnant — or in some cases, decreasing — compensation will not easily be forgotten.

Eventually, the job market will swing in the other direction. The top talent will feel no loyalty to the company that didn’t respect its workers during the recession, and they will leave for greener pastures.

The Wharton School highlights several recent surveys, showing that the short-term gains companies achieve by neglecting the benefits of their employees will likely result in long-term difficulties.

  • 36% of workers want to leave their companies.
  • 43% of human resources managers are concerned top employees will leave.
  • 35% of companies in the United States have smaller staffs than before the recession.
  • Companies have replaced full-time staff with temporary workers.

Companies cut compensation more for lower-level employees than higher-level, because executives view the average working middle class employee as easier to replace.

A company’s employees, literally its “human resources,” are the most important assets that a company can invest in. Proper handling and training will present a great return on investment. Spending money to support and enhance the lives of and benefits for employees keeps them engaged. If an employee believes he or she was treated well and respected during a time of economic upheaval, when employees at other companies are sharing their stories of frustration, the employee is more likely to appreciate the employer.

How has your employer treated you over the past few years? Have your compensation and benefits been scaled back? Will you stay when you know it will be easier to find a job?

Photo: dslrninja
Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania

{ 15 comments }

If you enter into an agreement with a company, and that company does something to wrong you, most of the time you can avail yourself of the American judicial system to correct the problem. This happens frequently, with both individual lawsuits and class action lawsuits. For example, Bank of America is dealing with several lawsuits stemming from shady fee practices and other policies enacted by Countrywide Financial, a company Bank of America acquired.

In order for bank to protect themselves from problems and major expenses like these is to take away their customers’ rights to a trial with a jury or a judge. This is legal, and you don’t even need to sign these rights away. Companies can change these terms of your banking agreement, and your continued patronage implies that you agree and are willing to waive your rights for the benefit of remaining a customer.

Wells FargoI make it a point to thumb through the mailed statements because banks will occasionally update terms and change fees, and it’s easy to miss this information if I were to only check my account online or in my Quicken software. A few days ago, I received my statement from Wells Fargo in the mail, and discovered a notice informing me that by remaining a customer at Wells Fargo beyond February 15, 2012, I would never be able to be included in a class action lawsuit or sue the bank myself. Any disputes would go through a binding arbitration process.

Binding arbitration has its benefits. It is often less costly, and businesses can generally get a sense for the result before moving forward. The benefits, plainly one-sided, end there.

Binding arbitration is usually detrimental to consumers. The costs for an individual often outweigh the potential reward, and potential rewards are low because binding arbitration often favors the large company over the individual, unlike juries and most judges. It’s easy to see why arbitrators favor big businesses; arbitration is a business, and if they favor a large corporation, that corporation will likely bring more business to the arbitrator.

A consumer initiating arbitration through the American Arbitration Association, the administer Wells Fargo identifies in its new terms, would be subject to fees, such as:

  • $250 for telephone consultation if the claim is less than $75,000, higher otherwise
  • $750 for in-person consultation of the claim is less than $75,000, higher otherwise
  • Up to $125 in additional fees if the claim is less than $10,000, up to $375 if the claim is less than $75,000, higher otherwise

The business would be subject to fees higher than those listed above for the consumer, but the total expense for a corporation could still be considerably less than dealing with a lawsuit. Not every arbitration organization follows the same pattern for fees, though. In some cases, the consumer could spend more money initiating arbitration than filing his or her own suit.

Also a detriment to the consumer, arbitrators are not required to follow an established process. This uncertainty can limit the consumer’s ability to argue. For example, arbitration does not include a discovery process, making it difficult for consumers to present evidence to support their cases. Also, the consumer does not have the ability to choose the arbitrator. The business selects the arbitrator, so it’s clear that this could easily be a biased approach to settling a disagreement.

Binding arbitration is reviled so much that Congress has been inspired to take action to determine whether binding arbitration clauses can be considered legal — in cellular phone contracts, only. So far, this effort has failed to produce any results beneficial for the consumer.

Bank of America and other banks have been the subject of a class action lawsuit alleging they have forced customers into mandatory binding arbitration agreements. The Supreme Court has ruled 5 to 4 in favor of companies’ options to put binding arbitration into customer agreements.

What a consumer can do about binding arbitration clauses

I’ve been a customer of Wells Fargo or its predecessors for most of my life. I’ve had my primary checking and savings accounts at this bank. But with this change, I am not wasting any more time in moving my money out of this bank. It’s not that I anticipate having any problems that require a lawsuit or arbitration, and if I am included in any class action lawsuit, I don’t expect to gain much.

Businesses and employers force binding arbitration on customers when the customers or employees are in a weaker position than the larger entity. For example, with unemployment high, many Americans feel lucky to have jobs. They’re willing to waive rights in order to be employed, and most do. Most customers will be unaware that by continuing to hold their accounts they waive their rights. Others will be aware and not consider this to be an issue worthy of going through the process of closing their accounts. Very few will use this as an incentive to move money elsewhere.

Banking institutions are everywhere, however, and customers have choices. For example, I could move all of my money held at Wells Fargo to Chase Bank. At one point, Chase included binding arbitration in its customer contracts for credit cards but has recently abandoned this approach. There is always a danger that the terms will change, particularly as more big banks want to protect the revenue they earn from fees. With a Chase branch within walking distance to me, this move makes sense, but it still isn’t a perfect solution.

I would prefer to switch to a credit union, but I’ve researched my options many times, and there are no credit unions convenient for me. Additionally, one of the largest and most popular credit unions, USAA, is as bad as Wells Fargo when it comes to members’ rights: USAA requires customers to waive their rights to a trial by judge or jury, just like the bank I intend to leave.

I’ll be moving my money out of this bank as soon as possible.

If you decide to move your business to a company that does not limit your rights, be sure to let the company know exactly why it is lowing your business. Unfair fee practices and binding arbitration could be only two of many reasons you’d be better off being a customer elsewhere.

Read the entire Wells Fargo notice below. Read the full article →

{ 32 comments }

After political bickering, the House of Representatives agreed to make a deal with the Senate to extend the payroll tax holiday. This tax cut reduced the payroll tax — a tax separate from but often associated with federal income tax — from 6.2% to 4.2% of the first $110,100 of wages. The tax benefits Social Security, a program politicians often claim is in danger of being underfunded. The payroll tax rate was scheduled to return to the normal amount of 6.2% at the beginning of 2012, but once a bill is signed into law, this rate will continue until the end of February 2012.

The Senate was only able to pass a bill that extended the tax cut for two additional months. In general, policy makers believe the lower tax rate will help stimulate the economy, but there are concerns about the effect of the long-term reduction into Social Security. After the Senate passed the bill, the House eventually relented. Part of the deal between the House and the Senate requires representatives to start working immediately on a new plan to find a way to extend the lower tax rate until the end of 2012.

Expanded federal unemployment benefits were also scheduled to end at the beginning of the year, but this bill would extend these benefits for two months as well.

The extension of the payroll tax cut and the expanded unemployment benefits will be paid for by an increase in the amount mortgage lenders must be Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to insure loans.

An average project manager saved $1,300 last year due to this tax cut of two percentage points, and if politicians agree on extending the cut for all of 2012, that amount could double by the end of next year. When the tax cut was announced initially last year, I offered 20 suggestions for using the money you save through the payroll tax cut. With doubled savings, the opportunities for using the cash benefit are even greater.

{ 5 comments }

More Homeowners Can Refinance

by Flexo

Thanks to some changes to the federal Home Affordable Refinance Program (HARP), more homeowners can qualify for government-endorsed refinancing. Previously, the program only offered refinancing options for households where the mortgage value was up to 97 percent through 125 percent of the home’s market value. This did help families who have become underwater, having more left to ... Continue reading this article…

4 comments Read the full article →

Working From Home Can Benefit You and Your Company

by Flexo
Home office desk

In my old corporate job, upper-level management stressed the importance of work/life balance and flexible working arrangements. The idea of work/life balance stems from the idea that most corporate employees recognize that working in a cubicle is not all there is to life, and despite pressure from supervisors and bosses, family life is important, too. ... Continue reading this article…

25 comments Read the full article →

Wealth Gap: Young Vs. Old

by Flexo
First Base

The wealth gap is growing, and if the Occupy Wall Street and its satellite protests are any indication, those not within the top one percent of income earners are not happy with their circumstances or the policies that help foster the wealth of those at the top. It’s been called class warfare, but there are ... Continue reading this article…

18 comments Read the full article →

Obama’s Student Loan Plan

by Flexo
Graduation

By executive order, President Obama has made a few minor changes to the student loan industry designed to help students and former students with unmanageable student loan debt. Anyone who began their undergraduate studies in 2006 probably did so with the reasonable assumption that they’d have a job after graduation. By the time these students ... Continue reading this article…

9 comments Read the full article →
Page 1 of 1112345···Last »