Get access to 100's of HR resources in HRM INSIDER

Learn More

HRMorning

Equal Pay Day Meets AI Reality: Here’s What HR Leaders Need to Know

Article

Equal Pay Day Meets AI Reality: Here’s What HR Leaders Need to Know

By

Equal Pay Day on March 26 carries new weight for employers this year. It’s a day to bring awareness and legitimacy to the ongoing issue of pay inequity and the gender wage gap in the U.S., and a moment for HR leaders to reflect on how they advance fairness and pay equity in compensation decisions.

However, reflection alone is not enough. Compensation decisions now sit at the intersection of heightened regulatory requirements, growing employee expectations for pay transparency and equity, and AI-driven workforce transformation that’s rapidly reshaping job responsibilities and salaries.

With change accelerating across multiple dimensions, advancing pay equity requires a more sophisticated and disciplined framework. Compliance must anchor the strategy, supported by ongoing pay analyses rather than annual reviews. It is also critically important for pay equity to be built into how roles are designed, how compensation decisions are made and how workforce transformation is managed.

The environment has changed, and pay equity strategies need to change with it.

Treating Pay Equity as a Continuous Exercise, Grounded in Compliance

Federal law, including the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Title VII, requires employers to maintain compensation practices free from unlawful discrimination. Alongside these federal laws, all 50 states and the District of Columbia have their own equal pay statutes, many of which impose pay equity standards that exceed federal requirements by covering additional protected characteristics, creating stricter rules around the factors that can legally influence pay, or raising the burden of proof for employers defending against pay discrimination claims.

This means that employers, especially those operating across different states or hiring remotely, must ensure that their practices comply with multiple laws. Equal pay compliance isn’t confined to a single headquartered location. It extends across jurisdictions where employees live and work. And with additional laws expanding and emerging each year, employers must constantly reassess and adjust their compensation practices to avoid legal risk, financial penalties and reputational damage.

At the same time, pay transparency laws in more than a dozen states are increasing visibility into pay practices and introducing new risks for employers on the talent side. Salary disclosure requirements give candidates and employees greater visibility into pay practices within their own companies and across the market. If pay differences appear unfair or unsupported, organizations risk eroding employee trust and weakening retention.

Brightmine research shows a third (33%) of employed Americans rank pay transparency and equity as a top job factor, on par with compensation and benefits (33%) and ahead of career growth opportunities (13%), workplace flexibility (11%), and company culture (10%). The findings signal that fairness and accountability in pay have become central to the employee experience and to long-term job satisfaction and commitment.

Equal Pay Day should serve as a call to action. Pay equity sits at the intersection of regulatory risk and talent strategy, and employers who fail to treat it as a priority today will feel the effects across their workforce and their bottom line over time.

The Double-Edged Sword of AI Transformation

Pay equity has always been a moving target, not a static achievement. Every workforce decision – hiring, promotions, merit increases, layoffs, acquisitions and beyond – has the potential to disrupt an organization’s pay distribution, introducing new inequity or exacerbating existing disparities. In any period of organizational change, it is crucial to be vigilant about the pay equity impact and proactively manage the risk it entails.

With AI already acting as a significant disruptor in the workforce and the pace of change accelerating, this task becomes ever more complex, but no less critical. AI is rapidly accelerating role evolution. Employees are taking on new AI-related responsibilities, new hybrid positions are emerging, and entire teams are being reorganized because of automation – and this is only the beginning. Per PwC research, AI is expected to fundamentally transform the global workforce by 2050, with estimates suggesting up to 60% of current jobs will require significant adaptation.

This AI-driven “role drift” complicates pay equity if job responsibilities and work evolve faster than an employer’s compensation frameworks.  Pay equity must keep pace with the realities of work as it is performed today rather than lagging behind.

And while a growing number of AI-powered technologies promise to help employers navigate through this period of rapid change, a healthy dose of skepticism is warranted. Any use of AI to make or influence a consequential employment decision – for example, hiring, compensation or termination – introduces a new potential source of bias and risk. Employers are fully liable for their practices regardless of which tools they use to make decisions, and the use of AI does not remove the need for employers to be able to explain and defend their pay practices.

However, with appropriate vetting combined with robust human oversight, AI-driven tools can play a role in advancing pay equity. AI excels at pattern recognition and may be able to help employers proactively identify and fix pay disparities before they become systemic, map out remediation strategies, and model the pay equity impact of upcoming workforce changes.

Building a Pay Equity Strategy That Keeps Up with Change

In this environment of constant change, it is critical that organizations build a pay equity strategy that evolves with shifting regulations, AI-driven workforce changes and evolving employee expectations. Pay equity must operate as a bedrock principle embedded in workforce strategy.

Achieving this requires HR leaders to:

  1. Define pay fairness. Start by defining what fair and equitable pay means within your organization, both in principle and practice. Fairness needs to align with evolving federal, state and local laws and reflect how employees experience compensation decisions. A strong strategy needs to consider both regulatory obligations and workforce perceptions.
  2. Articulate a clear pay philosophy. Leaders should be able to clearly explain how the organization approaches compensation decisions. A clearly defined and applied philosophy builds trust and protects the company from compliance risk.
  3. Move from one-time analysis to ongoing monitoring. A once-a-year analysis is not enough in a workforce that’s changing this quickly. Pay analyses should be continuous, so leaders can identify any disparities early and address them before they become systemic.
  4. Align job architecture to reality. Regularly revisit job descriptions and leveling frameworks to make sure they reflect how work is performed. As AI – or any other major workforce disruption – reshapes employees’ roles and responsibilities, pay strategies must keep pace with the changes.
  5. Equip managers as pay equity leaders. Managers are on the frontlines of workforce transformation. They influence pay and how roles are defined as AI continues to reshape day-to-day workflows. Because they see responsibilities shift in real time, they play a critical role in preventing pay gaps from forming. They need to be trained on the organization’s pay philosophy, legal standards and how to document and clearly communicate compensation decisions as they change.
  6. Prepare for constant change. Pay equity cannot operate on a fixed schedule. HR leaders should continue to challenge their approach by asking questions such as: “Are we reviewing pay equity only on a calendar schedule, or in response to workforce change?” and “Are our processes built to evolve?”

Equal Pay Day in the AI Era

In a business climate defined by heightened pay transparency, equity standards and AI transformation, pay equity is an ongoing project.

The question isn’t whether you ran a pay equity analysis this year or whether compensation frameworks are fair today. It’s whether they are built to stay fair as roles, skills and legal requirements evolve. The real marker of success is having compensation processes that are designed to keep pace with a workforce that is changing in real time.

Article

27 Ways to Say No Without Upsetting Them

By

You need to say No, but you hate doing it.

After all, your boss might think you’re lazy. Or your colleague might think you’re unhelpful. Your employee will resent you. Or the client will believe you don’t care. Your friend won’t invite you next time. Or your mom will deem you unworthy.

Fortunately, there are ways to say No without coming across as lazy, unhelpful, ungrateful or — God forbid — the worst of mom’s kids!

“Saying No — even if it’s in our best interests — can feel like failure,” says Julie Bee, author of Burned: How Business Owners Can Overcome Burnout and Fuel Success.

You Need Ways to Say No

Still, as a sensible leader — who needs to sleep, eat and do things other than say Yes — you need to reject requests, decline invitations and turn down ideas. Why?

  • You can’t do it all
  • It’s not always your place to do it
  • Others gain opportunities to step up
  • Some things don’t need to be done, and
  • The stress would be overwhelming!

“That said, all Nos aren’t created equal,” says Bee. “In some situations, you’ll want to let the other person down gently and leave the door open to future collaboration. In others, you might need to set a non-negotiable boundary. Sometimes you might want to explain the reasons behind your answer; other times it’s best to answer concisely and move on.

Fortunately, Bee breaks down the differences for us and gives many ways to say No in each situation.

You Need to Set Boundaries 

Sometimes, a No is necessary so you can set boundaries to maintain your sanity or space. So you can say:

No, I do not have the capacity to ….

  • I’m working on saying No more often; this is one of those times.
  • No, but I have someone who might be a good fit. Let me check in with them.
  • Right now and into the foreseeable future, I am focusing on … Therefore, I can’t move forward with/help with …
  • No, I want to create more space on my calendar, which means I’m turning down some things I would have said Yes to in the past. 
  • I am already over-committed/have a full plate, and I would not be able to give this the attention it needs/deserves. I have to say No. 
  • I recognize that what you are doing is important/has value, but at this time I can’t participate/listen/attend.
  • I promised my kids/spouse/family/employees/etc. I would say No to any new requests that interfere with weekends/evenings/focused work/team time, so I am saying No. 

You Can’t Do It Now

Many times, you have to say No because you don’t have the time now or in the foreseeable future. Say:

  • No, at this time, but please follow up with me in (weeks/months) when I may have more capacity to review/participate/advise/etc.
  • No, I have decided to pass on this project/request/etc. Thank you for thinking of me and please keep me in mind for future opportunities.
  • The answer is No for now, but the door is open for a later conversation.
  • I have other priorities at this time, so I can’t pursue this one.
  • This is something I’d like to keep on the table, but I can’t currently make it a priority.
  • No, I am booked solid through … Thanks for understanding.

You Feel Something is Off

Sometimes, the request or invitation seems out of the ordinary or too risky. To that, say:

  • My gut instinct is to say No, and I’m going to stick with my gut. 
  • I was initially excited about this idea, but upon review, I realize it isn’t a good fit. 
  • No, this doesn’t align with the mission statement and/or vision.
  • No, I am going in a different direction, but thank you for your time/offer/etc.
  • No, I have found a more ideal option that suits me better.
  • No, I don’t think our companies/personalities are a match.
  • I’m not the one to talk to about this. You’ll need to speak with ...

You Won’t Be Guilted Into It

Sometimes, a quick, firm decline is the best way to move on from someone who might try to guilt you into doing it:

  • No, thanks.
  • No, I am not interested. 
  • No, I’ve already exceeded my limit on that for the next months/years.
  • No, I am not able to take on …
  • No, I am going to burn out if I take on anything else.
  • No, I’m taking a break from things like this.
  • No, this isn’t in my wheelhouse.

“The word No is one of the most effective tools in your arsenal to ensure you don’t exceed your bandwidth,” Bee says. “Remember, opportunities are rarely once-in-a-lifetime. No doesn’t have to mean ‘No for all time.’ It can simply be a ‘No for now.'”

Article

How to Evaluate HR Tech Vendors for Cybersecurity

By

HR data – including CVs and payroll info – appeared in four out of five cyber breaches, a recent study found. That’s a wake-up call: The very systems designed to manage employee data can also expose it. Cybersecurity incidents involving employee information can lead to financial penalties, regulatory action, operational disruption and reputational harm.

As HR leaders evaluate new tech partners, it’s worth asking how each vendor protects employee data – not just how their platform makes work easier.

The good news: building cybersecurity into your vendor selection process isn’t complicated – it just requires a structured approach.

1. Understand What Data the Vendor Actually Touches

Before diving into a vendor’s data handling practices, HR teams need to understand which data the platform will access and store. Different HR technology products have different levels of risk depending on their functions. For example, a scheduling tool might require minimal personal information, while a payroll platform is more likely to handle more sensitive financial and payroll data.

Mapping data flows early helps dictate how rigorous your evaluation process should be. Account for what types of employee data are involved, where it’s stored and whether it moves across systems or regions. The more sensitive and far-reaching the data is, the stricter the evaluation should be.

2. Verify Compliance With Recognized Frameworks and Standards

Verified frameworks and certifications are strong indicators of an HR vendor’s baseline security governance. Compliance with industry standards such as SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001 and NIST demonstrates that a brand has formalized security policies in place and has been evaluated through independent audits.

However, it is also important to acknowledge that compliance does not guarantee absolute immunity from breaches. Certification should be treated as a baseline rather than a complete assurance.

3. Evaluate the Vendor’s Approach to Risk

Most HR tech vendors rely on external parties such as cloud providers, analytics tools and identity platforms to allow operations to run smoothly. Understanding how they manage their suppliers, assess third-party risk and validate controls is a highly important part of cybersecurity evaluation.

Identify how a vendor assesses third-party risk and what happens if a key subcontractor fails. Mature ones understand that security controls and risk management practices are only as strong as their weakest link and actively manage those relationships with defined processes.

Effective evaluations also depend on how vendors respond during due diligence. HR teams should ask specific, clear questions about how platforms monitor for security incidents, store data and assign internal security ownership. Inquiries about penetration testing frequency, incident response testing and workforce security training should be met with direct, specific answers. Those with established security practices should be able to explain what they do and how their processes have been effective in real time.

Teams can further assess preparedness by asking vendors to walk through a hypothetical security incident and request recent audit reports and past incident response cases. Transparency around past issues is far more of a positive indicator than a perfect, breach-free narrative. Those with tested response processes should be able to explain timelines, responsibilities and communication steps clearly without relying solely on documentation.

4. Look for Baseline Security Practices and Ignore Buzzwords

Many vendors utilize broad terms to describe their platforms, but those claims are only meaningful when backed by concrete practices. Even widely adopted platforms have experienced high-profile data breaches.

HR teams should look beyond marketing language and seek clear evidence of baseline cybersecurity practices and implemented security controls. At a minimum, vendors should be able to explain practices such as:

  • Using encryption for data in transit and at rest
  • Enforcing role-based access controls
  • Regularly patching known vulnerabilities, and
  • Supporting multi-factor authentication.

Those who struggle to explain the fundamentals in simple terms may lack repeatable security processes and accountability for protecting data.

5. Implement Ongoing Monitoring and Align Security Operations With Internal Workflows

Cybersecurity cannot be assessed only at onboarding. A vendor that appears secure initially may face new risks as threats evolve. HR teams should inquire how vendors monitor their environments on an ongoing basis rather than relying on annual assessments alone. Continuous monitoring reflects understanding that security is not static.

Even vendors that meet security requirements can introduce risks if internal workflows are weak. HR teams should evaluate how platforms will be used in practice, including access provisioning, role management and offboarding procedures. Ensure that access is limited to appropriate roles and that integrations with identity support timely access removal when employees leave.

6. Closely Review Contract Terms

HR teams should work closely with legal and procurement to ensure contracts clearly and fairly outline responsibilities. Confirm data ownership, notification timelines and the right to audit or request evidence of controls.

Clear accountability is critical. If a vendor suffers a breach involving employee data, the client should not bear all the costs. Well-defined contractual language supports a healthier and more resilient relationship.

7. Consider How the Product Is Likely to Change Over Time

HR tools are constantly evolving. Products get new features, integrations change and software develops, but innovation can sometimes entail greater data risk. Understanding how a vendor reviews security when new features are released can provide insight beyond certifications. Vendors that revisit risk as products evolve are safer in the long term.

Cybersecurity Is a Shared Responsibility

Though thoroughly evaluating HR vendors is time-consuming, choosing the right channel early can shape long-term growth and resilience. HR systems are increasingly positioned at the center of employee data ecosystems, making their security controls and incident readiness directly tied to organizational risk and employee trust.

By building an understanding of data exposure, asking the right questions, validating controls, and embedding security into contracts and workflows, HR teams can make the right decisions without becoming technical experts.

New

Employee or Independent Contractor? DOL Proposes New Rule

By

Who’s an employee and who’s an independent contractor? When making that determination for wage and hour compliance, businesses may soon have fewer restrictions.  

That’s because the Department of Labor (DOL) recently released a proposed rule on classifying workers, and it’s a return to a more business-friendly approach.

If the proposed rule is finalized, the 2024 final rule would be rescinded, and the 2021 final rule would be revived with a few modifications.  

Here’s what the DOL said in its February 26, 2026, proposed rule.

Employee vs. Independent Contractor

The 2026 rule would utilize the economic-reality test to get to the bottom of this key question when determining a worker’s classification: Is the individual in business for himself or herself, or is the individual economically dependent on an employer for work? The former indicates an independent contractor status, and the latter indicates an employee status.

As employers know, independent contractors aren’t covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), so classifying workers as such takes away the legal requirements to pay overtime and minimum wage to those individuals.

Two core factors will help employers determine the level of economic dependence a worker has on his or her employer – that’s being brought back from the 2021 rule. These core factors, which will carry more weight than others, are:  

  • The nature and degree of control over the work, and
  • The worker’s opportunity for profit or loss, based on initiative and/or investment.

In addition to the core factors, the proposed rule says that these factors will be included in the analysis:

  • The amount of skill required for the work
  • The degree of permanence of the working relationship, and
  • Whether the work is part of an integrated unit of production.

Definition of Employee

The proposed rule has implications for employers complying with other laws beyond the FLSA, including the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (MSPA).

Reason: The DOL’s regulations for FMLA and MSPA take their definition of “employ” from the FLSA.

What the Current Rule States

Technically, the 2024 rule covering who’s an employee or independent contractor is still in effect — it’s just not being enforced, as explained in Field Assistance Bulletin No. 2025-1.

In that May 1, 2025, guidance, the DOL said that when conducting FLSA investigations, the Wage and Hour Division would no longer use the analysis included in the 2024 rule to determine whether someone is an employee or independent contractor.

Rather, the Wage and Hour Division would rely on Fact Sheet 13, dated July 2008, as well as Opinion Letter FLSA2019-6, which has been renamed Opinion Letter FLSA2025-2.

The 2024 rule relies on the totality-of-the-circumstances analysis, which takes into account six factors, all with equal weight.

Those six factors are:

  • The worker’s opportunity for profit or loss
  • Investments by the worker and the company
  • The degree of permanence of the work relationship
  • The nature and degree of control over how the work is performed
  • The extent to which the work performed is an integral part of the company’s business, and
  • The worker’s skill and initiative.

Employers and other interested parties have 60 days to submit comments to the DOL on the proposed rule.  

New

IRS: Interest Rates Decreasing for Q2 2026

By

Interest rates for the second quarter will drop, the IRS recently announced.

According to Revenue Ruling 2026-5, the rates for April, May and June of 2026 will be:

  • Overpayments — 6% (down from 7%)
  • Corporate overpayments — 5% (down from 6%)
  • Corporate overpayments, for the portion exceeding $10,000 — 3.5% (down from 4.5%)
  • Underpayments — 6% (down from 7%), and
  • Large corporate underpayments — 8% (down from 9%).

New

AI Job Postings, Real Consequences: $9,460 DOJ Fine

By

Prompt. Generate. Post. That’s the new recruiting workflow for many HR teams turning to artificial intelligence (AI) to speed up job posting creation and target the best candidates.   

AI tools can generate job descriptions, highlight benefits, and even tailor language to attract specific skill sets. But unlike human recruiters, AI doesn’t get legal boundaries or the subtleties in employment law, and that gap in understanding can be costly. A recent enforcement action shows what can happen when AI-generated job postings go live without enough guardrails in place.

What started as an AI-assisted recruiting process ended with a nearly $10,000 penalty – plus additional relief.

Here’s the catch: The fine may appear relatively small at first glance. When you consider the “additional relief” – including staff training, updated policies and ongoing oversight – it’s clear that compliance carries both operational and financial impacts for employers.

Language in Job Posting Excluded American Workers, DOJ Says

The DOJ recently settled with Elegant Enterprise‑Wide Solutions over recruitment practices that violated federal anti-discrimination law. 

Specifically, the agreement resolves allegations that the company violated the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) when it used AI-generated job postings that contained citizenship status restrictions, including language restricting consideration only to applicants with H-1B, OPT, or H-4 visas. 

Under the settlement agreement, the company will pay a $9,460 civil penalty and implement a series of compliance measures, including:

  • Revising job postings and hiring policies
  • Training HR and recruiting staff on nondiscrimination obligations
  • Displaying federal workers’ rights posters in applicant-facing locations, and
  • Submitting to DOJ oversight for three years to ensure adherence.

“It is unconscionable for companies to illegally exclude U.S. workers when recruiting and hiring,” said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Civil Rights Division. “This Department of Justice will not tolerate discriminating against U.S. workers, no matter who – or what – drafts a job advertisement, or whether it is an employee, a recruiter, or an AI tool.”

Dhillon’s statement highlights a crucial point for HR teams: Even when AI is involved, ultimate accountability for compliance rests with the company. Regulators are watching, and even automated processes must align with federal hiring laws.

Takeaways for HR: AI and Job Postings

Following an established procedure can help reduce compliance risk while getting the benefits of automation: 

  • Maintain clear policies. Make sure job posting and recruiting policies explicitly prohibit discriminatory language. Align AI prompts, templates and posting guidelines with these policies before they’re used. 
  • Document training and processes. Train HR and recruiting staff on nondiscrimination obligations and keep records of that training. Document internal review procedures for AI-generated content so you can show due diligence if issues arise. 
  • Integrate AI into existing workflows. Don’t treat AI as a standalone process. Build it into your current recruiting workflow so approvals, reviews and audits happen naturally as part of posting content.
  • Review AI-generated job postings. Have HR or recruiting team members carefully check each posting before it goes live to ensure compliance and avoid language that could unintentionally exclude candidates. Incorporate peer review or a checklist to make this step consistent. 
  • Test AI regularly. Periodically audit AI-generated postings for bias, errors or legal risks. Running sample postings and simulating candidate scenarios can help catch problems early in the process. 
  • Vet AI vendors carefully. If you’re using third-party AI tools, review their compliance track record, transparency of algorithms, and ability to adjust outputs. Look for vendors with strong customer support who can help your team understand the tool and learn how to use it effectively. 

AI can streamline recruiting, but it’s not a set-it-and-forget-it solution. HR teams need clear policies, staff training, careful review of outputs, and a solid grasp of vendor tools to use AI effectively while keeping hiring fair and compliant.

Article

Cure to Employee Discontent? It’s Purposeful Work and Here Are 4 Solutions

By

Turns out, employees are still relatively miserable at work, regardless of where they work.

Employee discontent spreads across locations — in the office, hybrid and remote.

Employee engagement — the catchphrase that describes if they’re involved and enthusiastic about work and workplace — fell two percentage points to 21% in the past year, according to Gallup’s State of the Global Workplace report.

General well-being dropped to 33%, too, meaning employees are discontent with all things that affect their well-being, such as physical, mental, emotional, financial and social. They’re often burned out, disconnected and might feel underappreciated.

Employee Discontent Doesn’t Lead to Turnover

Here’s the irony. Employees are discontent, but they aren’t doing the obvious: leaving. Instead, they stay put — the phenomenon we know as job hugging — often withdrawing from work, co-workers and the workplace more.

But, here’s the good news. They aren’t leaving! You have the opportunity to re-engage employees, reignite the fire, rebuild their loyalty or just get them excited to walk in the door (or turn on their computers from wherever they are) every day.

Fortunately, researchers found ways to address the root causes of employee discontent. Here are five solutions.

1. Make Purposeful Work a Priority

Employees with a strong sense of purpose at work do really well across the board. A purpose cures a plethora of woes in the workplace, according to another Gallup study.

Consider these findings from the study, The Power of Purpose:

  • Only 13% of employees with a strong sense of purpose at work reported feeling burned out often or always, compared to 38% of those with a low sense of purpose.
  • Nearly 70% of people with a low sense of purpose are looking for a new job. Only about 40% of employees with a strong sense of purpose are keeping an eye out for a new job.
  • 50% of those who have a strong sense of purpose are engaged in their jobs, while just 9% of employees with low purpose are engaged

But most employees don’t have a strong sense of purpose. Forty-five percent say they work to collect a paycheck and benefits. Just 18% say their job has a purpose they personally believe in, and 12% believe their job allows them to pursue purpose in their life.

Some professions lend themselves to purpose — for instance, teachers driven to educate and healthcare workers driven to heal. But Gallup researchers noted that organizations can help employees in all industries gain purpose.

“Purpose is not exclusive to any career or calling. It can be cultivated in any role when the environment supports it. Gallup and Stand Together data suggest that employees are more likely to experience purpose when they see how their efforts make a difference through actions such as helping a customer or colleague, improving a process, or contributing to an important outcome.

Purpose is also strengthened when employees see how their role connects to the organization’s broader mission and why that mission is meaningful.”

2. Remove Frustrations

Harvard researchers suggested that employers work with employees to remove their biggest frustrations.

Ask them what makes work harder than it should be. Be prepared: They may tell you it’s an unmanageable workload or inefficient processes — and you may have to dig deep to fix issues.

But you’ll want to focus on removing friction and protecting people’s time. Clarify priorities and cut what isn’t essential. 

3. Delegate More Decisions

Encourage leaders to delegate more decisions. Of course, you’ll want to equip them — through training, support and resources — to allow employees to take the reins.

If they’re holding onto choices their team could be making, they’re slowing their people in many ways. They hurt their productivity, professional growth and morale. Managers will want to be clear about what employees own.

4. Offer Flexibility

Autonomy is a powerful motivator, and you’ll want to offer it as much as you can across the organization.

Wherever possible, give people control over how, when and where they work. What matters will vary by role and individual, but offering a choice is key. 

5. Foster More Connections

Even in remote and hybrid work settings, you’ll want managers to prioritize one-on-one conversations that go beyond task updates.

In addition to that, teams need space to connect with each other through shared projects, not forced activities. 

Article

All-Hands Meetings Done Right: 5 Steps to Strengthen Company Culture

By

Company all-hands meetings present great opportunities to provide clarity and connection. For fully remote organizations, the stakes are especially high. These annual gatherings are strategic culture touchpoints — rare occasions for leaders to reinforce alignment, belonging and shared purpose across their entire organization.

A strong all-hands meeting is not defined by production value or polished presentations, but by the intentional work done before, during and after the event to strengthen trust and connection.

1. Lay the Cultural Foundation

An all-hands meeting doesn’t fix cultural problems; it reflects the cultural health of the company. When employees feel unheard or disengaged year-round, no meeting can compensate for that gap.

People teams play a critical role. Readiness begins long before the agenda is set, with ongoing feedback loops that help leaders understand how employees are experiencing the organization. Regular pulse checks, employee-people leader conversations, and open channels for feedback ensure that employees feel heard well before they gather in person.

Equally important are the rituals that sustain cohesion in remote environments. Shared norms around communication, collaboration and decision-making create clarity when informal cues we get from working together every day are not available. When expectations are clear and consistently reinforced, all-hands meetings feel more like a continuation of shared understanding than a reset.

Trust is the foundation. All-hands meetings are most effective when employees already believe leadership listens and follows through. Without that trust, even the best-designed event risks being met with skepticism.

2. Create Leadership Alignment

One of the fastest ways to undermine an all-hands meeting is to treat it as a production led by the people team. In reality, these meetings are enterprise strategy moments, and they should be approached that way. Engagement influences retention. Alignment affects execution. Clarity reduces friction. When leaders understand how culture directly supports business performance, buy-in becomes much easier.

Internal data can help anchor the conversation. Trends in employee retention, engagement surveys or post-meeting feedback provide tangible evidence of what’s working and where gaps exist. Data alone isn’t the story, but it gives leaders a shared starting point as they work to improve from one year to the next.

Co-creation of pre-event messaging is just as important. When executives collaborate on themes and priorities ahead of time, they present a unified narrative rather than a disjointed collection of individual updates.

Employees notice when leaders are aligned, and they notice just as quickly when they’re not. When all-hands meetings are treated as a shared responsibility, they bolster credibility and authority. Well-aligned leaders make the gathering feel less like a presentation to employees and more like a moment shaped intentionally for leaders and employees alike.

3. Build Connection

As much as possible, all-hands meetings should feel participatory rather than scripted. Employees want to engage, not just consume information. Accomplish this by designing employee-driven moments into the agenda. For example, open Q&A sessions, spotlight stories and cross-team showcases allow employees to see themselves reflected in the broader organization.

Varying content formats is also helpful. Mixing formal updates with storytelling, discussions and informal interaction helps maintain energy and prevent cognitive overload. Screen fatigue is a real issue for remote organizations, so variety and thoughtful pacing make a real difference.

Creating the right energy happens through tone, inclusion and intentional design. Leaders who show up as fellow human beings who are willing to answer tough questions and acknowledge uncertainty create an environment where employees feel safe to engage. A properly designed all-hands meeting can renew collective momentum and remind employees they’re part of something bigger than their individual roles.

4. Convert Momentum into Cultural Strength

One big risk is that energy peaks during the meeting and evaporates shortly afterward. To prevent that drop-off, momentum must be carried forward deliberately.

Equipping people leaders with follow-up guides helps teams digest key messages, interpret them in the local context and translate ideas into action. These actions don’t need to repeat the meeting; they should extend it. Revisiting major themes through internal channels helps keep priorities visible without overwhelming employees or rehashing content verbatim.

Listening after the event is just as important. Structured feedback loops provide insights into how employees received and interpreted messages. Did they walk away with the understanding leadership intended? Where did interpretation diverge? That feedback should inform future planning. All-hands meetings are inputs into culture evolution, not just outputs of planning.

5. Co-Architect Culture  

In remote organizations, all-hands gatherings are high-leverage tools that an organization has to strengthen company culture at scale. If they’re treated as isolated events, their impact fades quickly. But when they’re approached as culture-building cycles, they multiply connection, clarity and engagement over time.

The most successful all-hands meetings are the result of intentional partnership across all the team leaders in an organization, functioning as co-architects of culture. When that partnership is strong, all-hands gatherings reinforce belonging and sustain momentum long after everyone goes back to their home offices.

New

Minimum Wage for Federal Contractors Increasing Soon

By

The Department of Labor (DOL) recently issued a Federal Register notice increasing the minimum wage for certain federal contractors.

Here are the details contained in the February 9, 2026, notice.

First, it’s important to clarify that the rate change applies to federal contracts covered by Executive Order (EO) 13658 – i.e., those entered into between January 1, 2015, and January 29, 2022, and not renewed or extended on or after January 30, 2022.

For covered contracts, here’s what’s changing on May 11, 2026:

  • Minimum wage will increase to $13.65 per hour (up from $13.30), and
  • Required minimum cash wage paid to tipped employees will increase to $9.55 per hour (up from $9.30).

Ending point

Next, the DOL notice explained that on March 14, 2025, EO 14236 revoked EO 14026.

The latter had increased the minimum wage rate for contracts entered into on or after January 30, 2022.

New

New Revision Date for National Medical Support Notice

By

Be on the lookout for an updated notice, requiring you to provide healthcare coverage to an employee’s child.

As in the past, if you receive a National Medical Support Notice (NMSN), you’ll need to act promptly to enroll the child in your group health plan and start withholding premiums from the employee’s wages — regardless of whether it’s open enrollment time at your company.

The Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) made only minor changes to the latest version of the NMSN. For example, the expiration date changed from November 30, 2025, to December 31, 2028 for both:

  • Part A, Notice to Withhold for Health Care Coverage, and
  • Part B, Medical Support Notice to Plan Administrator.

Seeking Detailed Info

Several websites, which allow employers to get detailed information, have changed on Part A and Part B.

On Part A, that includes the link to Supplemental Instructions for Employers, Employer Partners, and Child Support Agencies.

Given that questions on priority of withholding, for instance, would be best answered on the state level, Part A also includes the link to the state child support agency matrix.

What If Enrollment Isn’t Possible?

Also, the OCSE has revised some wording on Part A of the NMSN. It’s found at the top of page 3 where employers can indicate that enrollment isn’t possible and why.

The old form said: “The employer knows that the plan administrator cannot enroll dependents in employer-provided health care coverage for the employee named on page 1 because:” After that, the form provided a list of six reasons, with a directive to “select all that apply.”

However, the new form doesn’t include the step about choosing all that apply.

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
Copyright© 2026 SuccessFuel