In my previous post, I discussed the concept of employers utilizing services provided by faith based organizations (e.g., synagogues, mosques, churches and temples), social services agencies and community organizations, on behalf of their employees.

Well, I have worked with clients to successfully incorporate these third party services into human resources planning. Generally, this is done in instances where one or more employees aren’t covered by insurance, and my client doesn’t have in-house resources available. This post will discuss how to utilize these organizations’ services.

Some of my clients use social service, faith based and community based services to assist employees in dealing with personal, medical and substance related issues. In order to successfully incorporate these services, the employee has to be amenable to receiving these services, and the employee’s problems are remediable. Also, the cost of keeping the employee and incorporating these third party services has to be cheaper than losing the employee.

There are various ways to determine the costs of using third party services. Generally, the simplest way to cost this out is for the employer to estimate the number of hours and dollars spent determining whether the employee is worth keeping, how much time and money is spent choosing providers and using their services, and the potential unemployment compensation expense. This is compared to the time and cost spent recruiting, selecting, training and orienting a replacement. Besides looking at time and money as indicators of usefulness, there are other benefits to consider.

Non-monetary benefits of this strategy include that it’s an indicator of management’s commitment to workplace well- being, it increases loyalty and morale among other employees, it decreases turnover and it retains institutional knowledge. Of course, there is the downside to consider.

Negative factors include failure, the time and expense of dealing with this employee and their issues, exposing other employees to their behavior, employees may be wary of or adverse to faith based services, and per the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), employees receiving treatment for substance problems, may be deemed disabled and thus protected by the ADA. This could be a troublesome issue, but is really only determinable on a situational basis. Additionally, any concerns about religious or ideological discrimination can be avoided by permitting employees to opt out of using faith based services, and not showing preference towards any particular faith or ideology.

The bottom line is that employers who wish to incorporate social service, community and faith based organizations into their human capital plan, whether for one, a few or all employees, should consider alternative programs and organizations, weigh the costs and benefits, and make an educated decision about using this strategy. Relative to costs and the range of services offered, it might be best to take a free market approach and shop around for the best service and price. Moreover, I caution employers not to organize their employees into an internal association or group for examining, negotiating with or determining which third party providers to utilize.

The National Labor Relations Act and many state and local labor laws generally prohibit employers and employees from forming in-house groups to negotiate over wages, hours and the terms and conditions of employment. Therefore, as long as the employer acts unilaterally it should be fine. Of course, any employer should feel free to solicit and encourage employees to suggest workplace related changes through the use of suggestion boxes, surveys, 360 communication techniques, quality circles or committees designed to suggest workplace related changes. This is legal so long as it doesn’t involve negotiating or dictating changes in wages, hours, conditions and terms of employment. I realize that this may sound bizarre, but federal law doesn’t permit employers to create employee organizations for the purposes of engaging in any sort of negotiation or bargaining over wages, hours, terms and conditions of employment.

Please note the following disclaimer: All of the content on my blog is general information and should not be construed as legal advice. My blog is not designed to be and should not be relied upon as the sole source of information when analyzing and resolving a specific legal issue. Each fact situation is different, and the laws are constantly changing. If you have specific questions regarding a particular fact situation, you should consult competent legal counsel.

Finally, my appreciation goes to another management side labor and employment attorney, George Lenard of St. Louis. George provided valuable input on this post. George has been a commentator on this blog and vice-versa. George has his own blog, George’s Employment Blawg. He practices with the firm Harris Dowell Fisher & Harris in St. Louis.