Skip to main content

The World Cup Is On & I Have to Work?!?? Tips to Help Employers & Employees

I wrote this note a few years ago during the 2014 World Cup.  Given that today is the first day of the 2018 World Cup in Russia (and it starts in about two hours), I think it is timely to post this note again with a few additional thoughts.  

We all know what time it is.  Every four years, for a couple weeks, the World Cup comes around.  With that, comes the inevitable crush of employees who now want to take time off work, whether it be vacation days or "sick" days to watch the matches.  For those employees who do come to work, many stream the matches on their computers, phones, tablets, etc. during the day.  Unsurprisingly, this leads to a decline in work production.  The question then becomes, what can be done to combat this?

Some employers take a hard nosed approach and block any websites that employees could access to watch or listen to the matches, ban the use of employee phones or tablets at work, etc.  However, I have heard of some employees that intentionally slow down their work production as a form of protest when an employer takes these actions.  For the sake of argument, I will not comment on the merits (if any) of employees taking this form of protest...but it tends to happen in some workplaces this time of the year. 
The key thing is for employers to set expectations up front with employees.  Employers might be better served by reminding employees at the outset that while some leeway may be allowed, there is an expectation of consistent work output that is required to be met while the employees are at work.  A few things employers could consider doing:  
  • Remind employees that any absences will be deducted from vacation or sick days.  Ensure that this is consistent though.  If an employer lets one employee (or a group of employees) slide and then chooses to strictly enforce unexcused absences for others, that is inviting a lawsuit.
  • Do not require additional verifications (beyond what is normally required) when an employee calls in sick.  For instance, if a simple phone call or e-mail is acceptable when an employee is out sick, do not now begin requiring a doctor's note, a phone call from the physician, etc. when suspecting an employee is actually at home watching the World Cup.  Remain consistent.  
  • To drink or not to drink?  That is the question.  Do your employees operate heavy machinery, routinely drive during the day for work, have client meetings planned, going to be in court, etc, etc?  If so, it would be a good idea to remind employees that if they do watch a game, they are not to drink and show back up to the office intoxicated (or buzzed).  An employee who drinks while on a lunch break and then causes an accident during the workday could expose the employer to liability.  A good rule of thumb is to instruct employees not to drink during the workday, even if they go watch a match at a bar, pub, etc.  An employee handbook that lays out an employer's alcohol/drinking policy during work hours would be useful in this situation.
  • Be flexible:  Employees who are watching a match or checking scores are temporarily distracted while the match is on.  "Gently" nudging employees to get back to their work allows employers to remind employees that while they may want to watch a match, there are expectations for what they should be doing at work. 
  • This year, many of the matches are on earlier in the day (since the World Cup is in Russia).  As a result, some employees will likely want to go to lunch (much) earlier than normal.  If you, as the employer, are willing to accommodate a different lunch schedule for a few weeks, great.  However, in doing so, ensure that staffing levels remain consistent during the workday.  The last thing a client would expect is to call into your office at 10 AM and have no one answering the phone because a majority of the office is getting an early lunch to watch a game.
  • If there is a particularly big match (such as a semi-final game), consider ordering some pizzas and allowing the employees to watch in the conference room.  This is a good opportunity to turn the event into a team building activity, since many of the employees in all likelihood would not be working during the game anyways.  Having a designated time to watch could be a way of reminding employees that while they can take a break while the match is on, before and after the match, they are required to be working.  As well, allowing employees to watch the game at work would cut down on travel time before/after their lunch break and in turn maximize their productivity.
  • Allow employees to start work earlier or later or even allow them to switch shifts with other workers.  However, as with different lunch schedules, employers should be cognizant to ensure that proper staffing levels are maintained.


Now excuse me while I close my office door and watch a World Cup match in my office.


Special thanks to Suzanne Lucas for additional thoughts and comments on the topic:  http://www.inc.com/suzanne-lucas/the-world-cup-is-on-should-you-be-watching.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more