SEARCH

Entries in Job (4)

Saturday
Jun152013

Lululemon Uses Job Posting to Search for New CEO

Photo by Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images(NEW YORK) -- Lululemon is on the hunt for a new CEO to take charge of its "fun and irreverent brand," but its cheeky job posting may prove to be a tall order for those who aren't fluent in Sanskrit or define work-life balance with downing wheatgrass and tequila shots on Fridays.

The high-end yoga and active apparel company took to posting help wanted ads in storefronts around the country and on Facebook for a new chief executive officer after it announced that CEO Christine Day would step down when a successor was named.

"You report to no one, you are the CEO (duh). You are passionate about doing chief executive officer type stuff like making decisions, having a vision and being the head boss person," the company's job posting states.

Additional qualities desired for a new company-wide boss include being able to hold a headstand for at least 10 minutes, serious yoga proficiency and having celebrities like Ellen DeGeneres and Oprah Winfrey on speed dial.

The company "love(s) that our stores and social media teams are not afraid to spark a conversation in our communities," Lululemon said in a statement.

Since the company announced Day's departure on Monday, the Canadian company's stock plummeted approximately 20 percent.

Under Day, Lululemon suffered a public relations nightmare that forced them to pull their $100 a pair yoga pants from shelves for being too sheer when wearers bent over.

The March recall cost Lululemon approximately $60 million in lost sales and threatened the brand's reputation for quality apparel. The company has started to restock its shelves with a re-engineered version of their Luon pant that spawned so many devotees in the first place.

Day, 51, joined Lululemon in January 2008 and oversaw the company as its annual revenue quintupled to $1.37 billion.

"This was a personal decision of mine," Day said during the question-and-answer portion of a conference call with investors Monday about its first quarter earnings. "And, look, it's never a perfect time to leave a company you love. I've had a great run."

Copyright 2013 ABC News Radio

Thursday
Aug302012

Wells Fargo Fires Employee for False Dime Crime in 1963

Scott Eells/Bloomberg via Getty Images(DES MOINES) -- In 1963 a 19-year-old Richard Eggers committed a crime, putting a fake dime into a laundry machine in Carlisle, Iowa.  Eggers was spotted by the local sheriff and was convicted of operating a coin-changing machine by false means. He was sentenced to 15 days in jail, of which he served two. He was released early to return to college, and fined $50. Case closed.

Well, not so much. Now, 49 years later, Eggers’ past offense is coming back to haunt him.

Eggers worked as a customer service representative at Wells Fargo Home Mortgage in Des Moines until he was fired in July.  The reason given for his dismissal: the long-ago incident with the dime.

“We understand the outpouring of concern for Mr. Eggers and we want people to know that we take this matter very seriously,” the company said in a statement. “Wells Fargo is an insured depository institution, a global bank, bound by U.S. Federal law (Section 19 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act) to protect our customers and their personal financial information from someone who we know has committed an act of dishonesty or breach of trust -- regardless of when the incidents occurred. It is uncomfortable, but it is a law that we have to follow. We have the responsibility to avoid hiring or continuing to employ someone who we know has a criminal record.”

Mr. Eggers’ lawyer, Leonard Bates, spoke with ABC News, disagreeing with the company’s decision. “In 1963 Mr. Eggers was young he did something stupid. He put a wood dime in laundry machine,” he said.  “The spirit of the law was to prevent widespread mortgage fraud but does not apply to my client, who is a customer service representative.”

Mr. Bates did not lay all the blame on the company. “The FDIC’s regulation is overly broad,” Bates said, adding, “There are better, less harsh ways that Wells Fargo could do this without turning people’s lives upside down.”

Wells Fargo says it did everything in its power to keep Eggers working and in compliance with the law.

“When we found out about Mr. Eggers situation we began working with him immediately to help him learn about steps that he could take to make him eligible for reemployment at a financial institution. Specifically, he and any other workers in this situation can apply to the FDIC for written permission to work at a financial institution despite the existence of the disqualifying conviction,” Wells Fargo said in its statement.

The waiver process can take roughly six months and does not always result in reemployment. “Wells Fargo is touting the fact that employees can get waivers,” Bates said. “Some of my clients have obtained waivers but Wells Fargo has not yet hired them back.”

There is a faster, automatic waiver process, however.  In order to qualify the waiver-seeker must have committed a crime more than 10 years ago, received a sentence of less than 365 days, received a fine of less than $1,000, and served no actual jail time. Because Mr. Eggers spent two days in jail in 1963, he does not qualify for the automatic waiver.

Copyright 2012 ABC News Radio

Wednesday
Apr062011

UCLA Studies Show Stigma of Joblessness Is Immediate

Jupiterimages/Thinkstock(LOS ANGELES) -- Economists have known for years that long-term unemployment can greatly reduce a person's chances of finding another job.  But researchers at the University of California, Los Angeles, have found that the stigma of being unemployed begins the minute the person walks out the door.

"We're finding that people actually judge the unemployed as not good people compared to the employed," Geoffrey Ho, a doctoral candidate in human resources who led three studies of the psychological burden borne by the unemployed, said in a telephone interview.

It's not new that potential employers tend to shy away from hiring someone who has been unemployed for a long time.  The longer a person is out of work, the less likely it is that he or she will ever find another job, according to many studies.  That's partly because of "skill decay," especially in high-tech fields where the game can change on a daily basis, but it's also because of nagging doubts over the abilities, competence and confidence of a person who is unable to find work for months or even years.

What's new, however, is the finding that a worker's stock begins to decline immediately.  It's not a huge drop, at least initially, but it's significant, according to the UCLA studies.

The first two studies drew from UCLA databases, and most of the participants were students, who presumably have little or no experience in hiring people.  But the third was from a national database maintained by Amazon and widely used by researchers.  It is believed to be representative of the nation as a whole.

Participants in all three studies were given resumes from job seekers which told much about their lives, such as education, work record, experiences, and other factors.  Some of the participants were told the applicant was still employed.  The rest were told that he or she had been unemployed for just a few days.  The only difference was whether the person was still employed.

The participants were asked to rate the applicant on competence, including whether the person seemed confident, capable, efficient, intelligent, and skillful.  They were also asked if the person is friendly, good natured, sincere, trustworthy, warm and well intentioned.

"We were surprised to find that, all things being equal, unemployed applicants were viewed as less competent, warm and hirable than employed individuals," Ho said.  "We were also surprised to see how little the terms of departure mattered.  Job candidates who said they voluntarily left a position faced the same stigma as job candidates who said they had been laid off or terminated."

Only when the job loss was in no way attributable to the individual, such as bankruptcy by the employer, did the disadvantage of being unemployed disappear, the researchers said. ´╗┐

Copyright 2011 ABC News Radio

Tuesday
Nov302010

Cybershopping Yourself Out of a Job?

Photo Courtesy - Getty Images(NEW YORK) -- Office workers went online Monday en masse, using their employers' time to shop for everything from fruitcakes to holiday vacations, but what many such buyers fail to realize is that they may also be buying themselves a one-way ticket to the unemployment line.

Cyber Monday spending was projected to top $950 million, with 60 percent of customers shopping from work. A Shop.org survey released last week estimated 70 million Americans will shop from work at some point during this holiday season.

As much as Cyber Monday is a boon to retailers, it's a headache to employers who expect workers to work.

Most employers prohibit using office time and office computers for any sort of personal use, including shopping. Employees expressly agree to those terms when they sign employment contracts.

Yet according to a recent survey by CareerBuilder.com, 29 percent of workers say they have shopped online during past holidays, and 27 percent said that this year they intended to spend an hour or more; 13 percent said two hours or more.

All that shopping doesn't go unnoticed. Forty-seven percent of employers monitor employees' online activity, while 21 percent have fired employees for general Internet misuse, and five percent specifically for holiday shopping.

"Even if employers allow online shopping, employees should use good judgment and not abuse the privilege," said John Reed, executive director of Robert Half Technology. "Excessive shopping is a red flag that could put someone's job at risk."

Copyright 2010 ABC News Radio´╗┐







ABC News Radio