Control of worker compensation costs and OSHA compliance

Control of Worker Compensation Costs

The means in which economic agents approach business operations has changed dramatically throughout the past recent years as the competition intensified, the customers became more demanding, technologies evolved and so on. Still, the final goal of the economic entities remains unchanged, namely that of the generation of profits. And in order to register these profitability objectives, companies must operate in an efficient manner, which implies that the operational costs are minimized and the results are maximized (Daft and Lane, 2009). In this setting then, it is important for the worker compensation costs to be better controlled.

Some mechanisms of controlling these costs include the creation of strict budgets for worker compensation or the compensation through a combined plan of financial and non-financial incentives. The non-financial incentives include elements such as flexible working schedules or promotion opportunities, which increase employee satisfaction and performance due to motivation (Manzoor, 2011).

2) OSHA Inspection

OSHA -- Occupational Safety and Health Administration -- is the principal federal institution charged with the enforcement and verification of safety and health legislations within the United States employment community (OSHA Website, 2012). At the level of the employers preparing for an ASHA inspection, they should engage in the following:

Verification of all mechanism of employee safety used by the firm

The preparation of all documents necessary to the OSHA inspector

The analysis of any causes which might have determined the inspection

The insurance of transparency, full disclosure and complete cooperation with the OSHA inspector

The lecture of the OSHA Field Operations Manual for inspectors and the delegation of an organizational representative to meet with the inspector (Hosier, 2010).

Chapter 15 questions

2) Free speech and individual's rights

Employers might strive to limit the free speech of their staff members in order to prevent the spreading of any fact of perception that might damage the reputation of the entity. While this attitude might have some benefits at the business level, it would also raise some concerns at the level of individuals' rights.

In this order of ideas, the business gains would materialize in the control of the information which impacts employee motivation as well as the image of the firm (Daft, 2009). Still, it would conflict with human right if free speech and it would as such be illegal and unethical. This in turn would materialize in business shortages, such as loss of employee trust and respect. The best solution is that of creating a working environment in which information circulates freely and employee input is valued and integrated to improve the company (McLean, 2005).

References:

Daft, R.L., Lane, P., 2009, Management, 9th edition, Cengage Learning

Daft, R.L., 2009, Organiztaion theory and design, 10th edition, Cengage Learning

Hosier, F., 2010, Top 10 dos and don'ts for OSHA inspections from 2 OSHA inspectors, Safety News Alert, http://www.safetynewsalert.com/top-10-dos-and-donts-for-osha-inspections-from-2-osha-inspectors / last accessed on May 2, 2012

Manzoor, M.M., 2011, Relating emotional intelligence, compensation and motivation with employee's performance, LAP Lambert Academic Publishing

McLean, G.N., 2005, Organization development: principles, processes, performance, Berrett-Koehler Publishers

Sison, J.C., 2010, Without just cause and due process, PhilStar, http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=596988&publicationSubCategoryId=64 last accessed on May 2, 2012

2009, Due process vs. just cause, Oregon School Boards Association, http://www.osba.org/Resources/Article/Employee_Management/Due_process_vs_just_cause.aspx last accessed on May 2, 2012

2012, OSHA Website, http://www.osha.gov/last accessed on May 2, 2012