The Psychology Archives at the University of Akron will continue its fall colloquium series by welcoming psychologist Dr. Florence L. Denmark, on Tuesday, Nov. 17, from 2 to 4 p.m., in Student Union 312. Denmark’s lecture, “The History of Women In Psychology and the Development of the Psychology of Women,” is free and open to the public.

Denmark is an internationally recognized scholar, researcher and policy maker. She received her Ph.D. from the University of Pennsylvania in social psychology and has five honorary degrees. Denmark’s most significant research and extensive publications have emphasized women’s leadership and leadership styles, the interaction of status and gender, aging women in cross-cultural perspective and the history of women in psychology.

On Friday, I gave a talk at Bowling Green. My drive on the turnpike cost me $7.25 each way, for a total of $14.50. That is $7.25 to drive 2 hours on the turnpike. 

Now for $7.25 I did not get to a free beer, a free coke, or a free movie. I did get to buy overpriced gas and buy an overpriced coke at an oasis.

I am sure there is some logic to this pricing structure. Maybe they are trying to get more people to drive on old-fashioned 2 lane roads. But no wonder we have trouble attracting business and young people to Ohio.

The local IPMA-HR Chapter meeting has been set for Thursday, October 22nd at 8:30am at the Brecksville Community Center. Karen Seidman, R.N., M.P.H., consultant to the Cuyahoga County Board of Health, will review the basics of seasonal flu and pandemic flu and share current information about vaccine and antiviral medicine. Cost will be $10 for members and $15 for non-members which will include breakfast. If you are interested in going, you should contact esiegfried@cityofparma-oh.gov by this Friday, October 16, 2009.

For some reason my reply button for responding to comments does not work. So I am replying here to comments received from Mark and Tim to a previous blog.

In response to Tim, my powers of prediction were based more on history than on moral hopelessness. For some reason, the courts have consistently drawn a distinction between age and other forms of discrimination. Given the only protected class I fall into is age, this does upset me some, but nevertheless it exists. So I do not believe it has anything to do with laissez-faire doctrine or Reagan, it has do do with the courts consistently drawing a distinction between theories of age discrmination and for example sex and race discrimination. Is this distinction based on any science? Harvey Sterns and I point out in our chapter on the law and age that there does not appear to be any theoretical or scientific basis for this distinction. Of course, we have not really conducted research on the difference in theories in this realm, so perhaps it is we psychologists who are at fault.

I would add that most people do seem to believe that a company should take age into account in making personnel decisions. See for example our emphasis on workforce and succession planning. But that is another issue.

As for Mark’s comments, I would not be the first to point out that the so-called balancing of burdens of proof is more of a legal theory than a courtroom reality. the burden is more of a subtle weighing carried out in the processing of information than a matter of one team being the offense until the punt (to poorly use a football analogy).

Anytime a factory closes, there is a tremendous social cost. The question then becomes one of how, if at all, should we compensate those hard working individuals who suffer as a result of the changing fates associated with capitalism. In the US, our solution has been to let them sue, often arguing that they were terminated as a result of discrimination if they belong to some protected class. I think this is the issue Mark is addressing, is this then the best use of the courts? Is this the best method of determining who should be compensated and how much they should receive?

Although I just wrote yesterday about the dangers of predicting the future, this was an easy one for me to predict. The New York Times reports that Democrats are working to overturn the latest Supreme Court case dealing with age discrimination. The case and ruling makes it harder for older workers to prove age discrimination. My guess is that the Supreme Court ruling was a practical one, wanting to avoid having the courts overwhelmed with layoff cases alleging age. It would also seem easy to predict that the Democrats will pass legislation overturning the decision in the case of Gross v FBL Financial.

I find it extremely difficult to predict the future. Everytime I try to I am wrong.

So I provide this report from IPMA-HR on job losses in the government. There are of course two issues. One how many losses will there be over the next two years. Two, how will this impact the relative ratio of government to private sector to NGO.

From IPMA-HR, “According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), there was a decline of 263,000 jobs in September. This marked the 21st consecutive month of job losses and since the start of the recession the number of unemployed persons has increased by 7.6 million. The government sector lost 53,000 jobs in September. All sectors of the government experienced job losses, with the federal government including the United States Postal Service losing 6,000 jobs, state government including education declining by 10,000 jobs, and local government including education falling by 37,000 jobs.”

I have provided a number of previous posts on the Jack Welch Management Institute. 

According to Crain’s Cleveland Business “In an interview with Fortune, former General Electric CEO Jack Welch, just out of the hospital, says his Jack Welch Management Institute should be moving ahead soon. The institute is an online MBA program that will offer classes at Cleveland’s Chancellor University.”

The Archives of the History of American Psychology (AHAP) will host Dr. Don Routh, Wednesday, Oct. 14, from noon to 2 p.m. in Student Union Ballroom E, on the University of Akron’s Main Campus. Routh’s presentation, titled “Psychology and the American Indian,” begins the AHAP’s fall colloquium series.

Routh has written numerous journal articles and edited books, and is the author of “Clinical Psychology Since 1917: Science, Practice, and Organization” (New York: Plenum Press, 1994). He received an M.S. in psychology in 1965 and a Ph.D. in clinical psychology in 1967, both at the University of Pittsburgh. Most recently, Routh attended Florida Gulf Coast University and obtained a second B.A. in history in 2006, and is currently working on completing an M.A. in history. His current research project focuses on the dialogue between professional psychology and the American Indian. He has served as professor at various institutions since 1967, but spent most of his career at the University of Miami, where he has been professor emeritus since 2002.

Routh was also president of several divisions in the American Psychological Association, and has been awarded fellowship status in many of them. He has received a variety of honors, including the Nicholas Hobbs Award, Edgar A. Doll Award and the Award for Distinguished Professional Contributions in Clinical Psychology.

For more information, contact Dorothy Gruich at ext. 7285 or visit the AHAP Web site. The Psychology Archives Colloquium Series is free and open to the public.

We have previously discussed the phenomena of employers searching social network sites for information on job candidates. The September issue of IPMA HR News report on a CareerBuilder Survey that finds 45% of employers use social network sites to research job candidates, up from 22%.

Of those:

1. 29% use FaceBook
2. 26% LinkedIn
3. 21% MySpace
4. 11% Blogs
5. 7% Twitter

My question would be what exactly people are searching for on Twitter? Are they following job candidates for a number of days? Again, the lesson, be careful of what you post online.

The Partnership for Public Service has done a lot of really good work on HR issues in government. In the most recent (September) issue of IPMA HR News Magazine, Bob Lavigna has an excellent article on senior leadership in the federal government. The main points of the article can apply to many organizations:

1. Many leaders have technical competencies rather than managerial or leadership competencies leading to an overemphasis on agency specific issues.
2. The recruiting and selection process is broken. One result is a failure to bring in external talent.
3. Agencies fail to assist external talent with transitions to government roles.
4. Competencies are not integrated.
5. Development is not a priority.

I guess a simple summary would be – apply basic principles of HR.