Every police officer in the state has the power to commit someone who is believed to be a danger to themselves or others. That authority comes from Connecticut General Statute §17a-503(a). The statue reads, in part, “Any police officer who has reasonable cause to believe that a person has psychiatric disabilities and is dangerous to himself or herself or others or gravely disabled, and in need of immediate care and treatment, may take such person into custody and take or cause such person to be taken to a general hospital for emergency examination under this section. The officer shall execute a written request for emergency examination detailing the circumstances under which the person was taken into custody, and such request shall be left with the facility. The person shall be examined within twenty-four hours and shall not be held for more than seventy-two hours….”
 
We all know how this works. The police receive a call, and after an investigation, if the officer believes the person to be a danger to themself or others, the officer fills out a form, calls an ambulance, and the person is transported to the hospital for a psychiatric evaluation. This statute, and procedure, is used for a number of occasions including someone who is believed to be suicidal. This is generally not challenged, although it is a seizure under the Fourth Amendment, because no charges are filed and this is seen as a protective act, rather than punishment. Under the same theory, when the police believe someone is in danger of using a firearm against themselves, they generally seize the firearm or firearms, for safekeeping. This is where there might be an issue.
 
The United States Supreme Court recently released an opinion that clarifies when and how an officer seizes firearms after a committal. The facts of Caniglia v. Strom are typical. Mr. and Mrs. Caniglia got into an argument, after which Mr. Caniglia put a handgun on the table and asked his wife to shoot him and get it over with. Obviously she did not shoot him; rather, she left the house and spent the night at a hotel. When she could not get in touch with her husband the next morning, she called the police. The police contacted Mr. Caniglia that morning and decided to have him evaluated at a hospital. Mr. Caniglia agreed to go to the hospital peacefully under the condition that the police did not seize his guns. Once Mr. Caniglia left the scene, the police seized his firearms. Now, to be fair, that was the right thing to do. You certainly would not want Mr. Caniglia coming back from the hospital to a house full of guns. The problem is with the way the guns were seized.
 
Mr. Caniglia upset that the police seized his firearms, brough a §1983 civil rights action against the police alleging his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure were violated. Initially, the Federal District Court dismissed the suit citing the “community caretaker” exception to the search warrant requirement. After appeal, the United States Supreme Court decided to hear the case. The Court held that the community caretaker function, and exception, does not justify warrantless searches of a person’s home. Justice Thomas explained, “ “The very core of the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee is the right of a person to retreat into his home and ‘there be free from unreasonable governmental intrusions.’”
 
So now what? The answer is not to avoid seizing firearms, but to use the tools you have at your disposal. Your best bet is to secure the residence and apply for a firearms risk warrant. If you are not familiar with a firearms risk warrant, please review Connecticut General Statute §29-38c. While this may be a little more work, it protects you from liability and ensures a hearing before firearms are released back to the person. This protects both you and the owner of the firearms.
 
If you have any questions about how to use a firearms risk warrant, or your administration is giving you a hard time about the added workload, please give us a call. We can answer all your questions.

"Always a beautiful answer who asks a more beautiful question." - e. e. cummings

​Nutmeg hosted a webinar recently which focused on helping folks improve as union leaders. Attorney Eric Brown highlighted the five most common problems union leaders face; the 5th problem he emphasized had to do with listening and questioning. I won’t review the webinar in depth now, but if you’re interested, you can watch a recording here.
            Eric’s talk got me thinking all about questioning and the innovative power of inquiry. I’ve personally been off the research deep end trying to discover how to improve my ability to ask great questions and how I can do it without being annoying (child repeatedly asking “Why”) or too philosophical (“what is the meaning of life”)
            On my journey I found the book A More Beautiful Question written by Warren Berger in 2014. I’m not even a quarter of the way through it yet, but every passage has resonated strongly with me, especially when viewed through the lens of public sector employees and the challenges they face. Without diving too deep into the details of the book (you can find the book here or here and an audiobook here), Berger does a fantastic job of highlighting how much of the modern day work environment actively discourages questioning - in some cases it can lead to formal discipline (we’ve got your back if that ever happens).
            But questioning is the genesis of any innovation, improvement, or change. If we want to improve our lives and the lives of our members, we MUST be asking good questions. The past year has accelerated unprecedented change onto all of us. As the velocity of that change begins to slow and some “normalcy” returns, I propose that our questioning should begin to pick up the pace.
            I don’t propose questioning past decisions, armed now with the benefit of hindsight. We can’t change the past, and it won’t win you any points with your employer. I do propose asking the beautiful questions that will shape the future of your work landscape: 

• “How can we improve our retirement security as pensions become less common?”
• “Why isn’t professional development (training/certifications/degrees) a priority to my employer?”  
• “What if we had some alternative schedules which improve work-life balance for employees”

 
If you get the answer, “Because we’ve always done it that way,” you’re on the right track. Keep asking questions and be proactive in hunting for solutions. In the book, Berger offers a framework of “Why?,” “What if?,” and “How?” for developing big, beautiful questions.  He makes it clear that it is not a formula for perfect questions (no such thing exists), but it is a good starting point. When things are complex, approaching them systematically can be extremely helpful. 
Taking ownership of the future starts with questioning the status quo, even if that questioning makes people uncomfortable. If you need help, guidance, or additional support, we are here to help.

​On May 13, 2021, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) updated the masking guidelines. Many thought the new guidance was confusing - it’s actually not. The guidelines themselves are very simple. If you are fully vaccinated, meaning it has been two weeks since your second Pfizer or Moderna vaccine, or two weeks after your one dose of the Johnson and Johnson vaccine, you no longer have to wear a mask inside or outside, unless required by law. To put it simply, the CDC is saying fully vaccinated people no longer have to wear a mask except for certain circumstances. There is no confusion there. But this is only guidance, not policy.
The confusion comes with the practicality of this guidance and how the general population and businesses will handle the change. Here in Connecticut, Governor Lamont has decided to suspend the mask requirements indoors and outdoors for fully vaccinated people, starting May 19, 2021. This has raised several questions. First, how do we know who is vaccinated and who is not? For the most part, people are expected to work on the honor system. If you are not vaccinated, you must be wearing a mask - it benefits you and others who are not vaccinated. The second question that has been raised is: can a business owner ask me if I am vaccinated? Doesn’t that violate HIPAA?
Yes, a business owner or employee can ask you about your vaccination status, and no, that does not violate HIPAA. First of all, business owners are well within their rights to establish policies to make their businesses safer, including requiring the wearing of masks by everyone, even if you are vaccinated. The new CDC guidance does not force a business owner to end masking, nor does the Governor’s latest masking order.
If a business owner decides to ask customers for their vaccination status, or even ask for proof, they can. You are under no obligation to answer or prove your vaccination status, but you will be treated as unvaccinated and will still be required to wear a mask. Next, HIPAA only applies to healthcare related businesses; thus, most business will not violate HIPAA by simply asking you for your vaccination status.
In the end, businesses and the vaccinated general population will now have the choice to mask or not to mask. Businesses are free to allow unvaccinated people to go maskless, or they are free to require masking for all customers. Finally, vaccinated people can still choose to wear a mask if they like. The mask has become part of our culture over the last fifteen months, and many may not be quite ready to sideline it just yet.
While the practical application of the CDC’s new masking guidance seems confusing, it is really all about choice. You can choose to get vaccinated and take the mask off. You can also choose to keep wearing the mask of you’d like. Businesses can choose to allow customers to go maskless or continue to require a mask. Notwithstanding, if you have not gotten the vaccine, you do not have a choice. The rule is that you must still mask up.
If you have questions about workplace masking polices, please give us a call. We can help you navigate through the confusion and uncertainty.

​There has been some talk in the news lately about a strike involving unionized healthcare workers, specifically healthcare workers employed at state-run nursing and group homes. The reasons cited range from low wages, poor benefits, and working conditions to lack of adherence to coronavirus standards. The union states twenty-four employees have died due to the virus. Some of the union’s more disturbing claims relate to the lack of personal protective equipment, deficient testing programs, and staff shortages. While Governor Lamont has offered $280 million in federal funds, it is going to be interesting to see how this plays out.
I’m sure everyone has heard the term “strike” before and generally knows what it means. However, there are still some misnomers out there, and if you’ve never been involved in a strike before, you may not know how it actually works. Hopefully, this article will clear up any questions.
A union or labor strike occurs when unionized workers collectively agree to stop working in order to gain a concession from an employer. The key term in this definition is “collectively.” A strike and a related picket are both concerted activities protected by the National Labor Relations Act. In order for the strike to be protected, it has to be a “concerted activity,” meaning it has to be done collectively by a majority of the union members and be endorsed by the union. A single worker cannot decide to stay home from work for a week and call it a strike. That is not a collective activity and, therefore, is not protected - you will be fired for this.
Typically, strikes arise out of a breakdown in contract negotiations, grievances that are not addressed, or a unilateral change in working conditions. Strikes can also arise from allegations of unsafe working conditions or unfair labor practices that violate state and federal labor laws. As I said earlier, workers that strike are protected and generally will not be fired for going on strike. However, the company is not required to pay an employee while on strike, and striking employees are not eligible for unemployment.
A strike is a union tactic designed to force the company into meeting its demands. The idea is that the company cannot function without workers; thus, management is pressured to cave. Yet the union is not the only entity to have some leverage. The company can also engage in a protected, concerted activity called a “lockout.” This is where the company locks out or prevents the union workers from coming to work—without pay and benefits, of course—and hires replacement workers. This tactic is designed to get the union to cave and meet management’s demands. Again, this is also a protected, concerted activity that must be endorsed by the company management. A disgruntled company supervisor cannot lock out a certain employee or shift on their own. That would be illegal, and the supervisor would face discipline, and the company could be liable for damages.
With that said, public sector employees in Connecticut cannot strike. The Municipal Employees Relations Act, the Teachers Negotiations Act, and the State Employees Relations Act all prohibit public sector workers from striking.
In the end, strikes can be dicey. There are rules that need to be followed and contracts to be reviewed before a strike can be planned. Furthermore, the underlying dispute may not be resolved by striking. If you are in a private sector union and are thinking of striking, please consult with an attorney experienced in these matters. If you have questions on strikes or need some advice on whether a strike is right for your union, give us a call. We are here to help.

President Biden’s $2.5 trillion infrastructure plan has certainly caused some stir in the past few weeks. The plan is unprecedented in terms of spending and drastically expands the definition of infrastructure. That could be good or bad, depending on your political leanings.
            However, I would like to talk about the expanded union protections built into the proposal. The most current version of the American Jobs Plan includes the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act. According to the Administration, "President Biden is calling on Congress to update the social contract that provides workers with a fair shot to get ahead, overcome racial and other inequalities that have been barriers for too many Americans, expand the middle class and strengthen communities." Furthermore, "He is calling on Congress to ensure all workers have a free and fair choice to join a union by passing the [PRO] Act and guarantee union and bargaining right for service workers."
            Expanded union protections include giving the National Labor Relations Board the power to fine employers who violate workers’ rights, increased protections for independent contractors, easing restrictions on strikes, and weakening “right to work” laws. Unions in general can help workers increase pay, increase benefits, and improve working conditions. Proponents of union rights are fawning over the bill, while opponents claim the bill could reduce jobs and harm workers who do not wish to pay unions dues.
            The reality of it is that union membership has many benefits, including the right to bargain collectively. The process of collective bargaining, otherwise called contract negations, gives unionized workers more power to set and standardize salary, benefits, working conditions, disciplinary procedure, grievance procedures, and other protections, such as “just cause,” that would otherwise be unavailable to the individual worker. Overall, union membership is an advantage to workers all across the country. Yes, you have to pay dues to be a member. However, the benefits far outweigh the cost, making it a very good investment.
Unions have helped many industries, such as construction, manufacturing, transportation, and public safety, become some of the most sought-after jobs with high salaries, good benefits, and high levels of employee protection. According to the Nation Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were more than 14.3 million unionized workers in the United States in 2020. While that number is somewhat lower than the number in 2019, it was greatly disproportionate to the number of non-unionized workers who lost their job due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Unionized workers decreased by 2.2 percent from 2019-2020. Non-unionized workers decreased 6.6 percent from 2019-2020. That alone shows how powerful unionized workers can be and how being a member of a union can help keep you employed, even during a crisis. Moreover, if you are laid off as a union worker, there are protections in place to reduce the impact and rules that must be followed before a layoff can even happen. Non-unionized employees enjoy no such protections.
            While some may not agree, union membership is good for most employees. President Biden’s infrastructure plan, if passed as is, will expand union rights for everyone. In my opinion, this is a good thing. If you are looking to unionize, please give us a call. We would be happy to help you get the process started, and we would love to represent you.

​I want to touch on online privacy and doxxing protection for public sector employees.  For those who don’t know, “doxxing” is when personal information like your address, phone number, email, are published online for nefarious reasons. It has happened to celebrities, politicians, teachers, police officers, and nurses. It’s a brutal tactic that can cause considerable trauma to a person and their family.
            Public information accessibility laws put public service employees at increased risk of being doxxed, because their names (and sometimes salaries or other information) are required to be available to the public either through a search or a formal request. The new police accountability bill in Connecticut legally requires Police Officers to display their names at all times on their outer most garment.
            The motives for doxxing someone vary widely. Sometimes the doxxer wants to harass an employee they don’t like. Anti-law enforcement activists routinely doxx officers and their families following notable incidents. Sometimes it just an internet person, who takes issue with a post or comment on social media. In all cases, the doxxers weaponize your name or other publicly available information about you in order to terrorize you in your own home.
            How do they do this?  By scouring the internet for “bread crumbs” of published information. The most prevalent sources of this are from large data broker websites like whitepages.com, fastpeoplesearch.com, spokeo.com, and many others. These data brokers aggregate publicly available data (voter records, home sales, department directories, etc.) and compile a database that allows users to search names, addresses, phone numbers, etc. On some sites the search is free, some sites charge a fee.
            They do this without your permission, and the information is generally pretty accurate.  The good news is you have the right to opt out and have your information kept private. The bad news is opting out is generally a total time-consuming pain in the neck. Most sites make it deliberately difficult to remove your information. And with over 30 popular sites, it can be an almost impossible task. Worse yet, the opt-out usually needs to be done annually.
            So, what can we do about this? For one, we can start the conversation with employers about the true risk and dangers of doxxing. This absolutely is a labor issue, no different than any other condition of work matter which gets negotiated. It does require a collaborative approach to be most effective. If employers are required to expose employees’ names and information to the public, then they should also be willing to provide assistance in protecting those same employees from doxxing.  On the employee’s side, they need to take practical measures like maxing out their privacy setting on social media platforms (or deleting them all together).
            How do employers protect employees from doxxing? Either by providing the time and resources for employees to opt out from each data broker or by purchasing a service that will do the work on behalf of the employees. Services like deleteme.com or onerep.com will remove your information from all of the data broker websites. To be most effective, the opt-out service should include the employees’ spouse and immediate family. It also needs to be proactive, because it commonly takes 30-90 days to get some data brokers to remove information. Waiting until an employee has been threatened or been involved in a public incident is way too late. If you are interested in doing the leg work yourself, here is a DIY guide on how to remove your information and opt-out of data broker websites
            Doxxing lives in a legal grey area, too, because much of what is published is gathered from public information. There are very few criminal legal protections against it. Most doxxing crimes would fall under harassment or stalking statutes. It can be very difficult to prosecute, and it does not seem to be going away anytime soon.
The end goal is for our employees to feel safe in their homes and enjoy the same privacy rights as other members of the workforce. If you’re concerned about your doxxing exposure, would like additional training or information, or would like to negotiate protective measures with your employer, please contact Nutmeg so we can help you achieve your goals.

I read an interesting article in the newspaper the other day. A Connecticut city firefighter was terminated after testing positive for marijuana. On its face, that may not seem all that unusual. What separates this case from others is the fact that this firefighter was legally prescribed medical marijuana for the treatment of certain medical conditions. In the end, that did not matter to the city. The city’s position was that, in policy, it followed federal law, and marijuana is still illegal. Any use is a violation of its policies and grounds for discipline.

Marijuana is classed as Schedule I controlled substance under the Federal Controlled Substances Act. That means the feds looks at marijuana the same as heroin, cocaine, and other illicit drugs: there is no acceptable medical use for the substance, and there is a significant potential for abuse. As with many topics today, this is a highly charged political debate. There are some that feel marijuana has no place in society and has no legitimate medical use. There are others that feel it should be regulated and taxed, much like alcohol. And then there are some that feel marijuana should be widely accessible to the public with little to no regulation. With that said, Connecticut has legalized marijuana for medical use when prescribed by a health care professional.

Getting back to the firefighter. After his termination, the firefighter filed a lawsuit in Federal Court claiming he was discriminated against because he was using marijuana for medical purposes under the care of the licensed medical professional. The suit was dismissed by the Court with the Judge finding that marijuana was still illegal under federal law, thus cannot be a basis for discrimination.

The part I found interesting was that the Federal Judge suggested the case be refiled in State Court. Reason being, Connecticut has protections built into its palliative marijuana law protecting employees from discrimination based on medical marijuana use. Now, this is not a total guarantee that you cannot be fired if you have a prescription from a doctor; in fact, the law makes it very clear that an employee cannot use marijuana while at work and cannot be under the influence while at work.
​
If you are a medical marijuana user and have been terminated or disciplined at work, there may be some protections available to you. Furthermore, the underlying condition that you are using marijuana to treat may be a basis in itself for a discrimination claim. If you feel you’ve been treated unfairly at work because of your disabilities or the use of medical marijuana, please give us a call. We would be happy to talk through the issues and discuss your options. 

According to a 2020 report by the U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, the median tenure of an employee in the private sector was 3.7 years.  The median tenure for an employee in the public sector is nearly double that at 6.5 years.  When this number is highlighted against the soaring costs of employee turnover, which is estimated to be 33% of the workers annual salary, it becomes evident public sector employers should be jumping for joy.  But many still feel there is a serious turn over problem in the public sector.

In this 2016 study, 30% of public safety employees changing careers cited “Lack of direction from upper management” as their number one reason for leaving. 

What’s one simple way we can ensure employees have “direction” from upper management? The answer is a career roadmap: a clear laid out plan for your future within the organization. From day one an employee will know the direction their career is headed and the investment the organization is committed to making in them.

Career roadmaps are fairly simple to develop but can pay dividends in terms of employee satisfaction, organizational performance, and retention.  In fact, organizations with defined professional development plans have employee retention rates 34% higher than those without.

Career road maps are good for the employer too.  It allows the organization to more accurately plan their training costs, improves current performance, and ensure continuity of leadership in the future.  It may also help eliminate nepotism and disputes as the career development paths are laid out for everyone to see. 

My first career was in law enforcement, so it’s where I have the most familiarity and why I chose to use it as an example.  But a career road map can be applied to any public sector job, and the milestones and events on the road map can be negotiated into collective bargaining agreements.

An example of a career roadmap in law enforcement might look something like this:
 
•       Police Academy FTO, Probationary Period
•       1st Anniversary - Advanced DUI Course
•       2nd Anniversary - Advanced Traffic Investigations
•       3rd. Anniversary- Narcotics interdiction for the patrol officer
•       4th Anniversary - Interview and Interrogation
•       5th Anniversary - FTO Course
•       6th Anniversary - Advanced Crime Scene investigation
•       7th Anniversary- First Line Supervisors Course
•       8th Anniversary – Elective based on interest (Investigative track or administrative track)
 
This is just a hypothetical example; however, the point is to choose trainings and assignments that coincide with the normal growth and development of the position. Typically, new cops work midnights and handle lots of DUI’s and traffic accidents.  As they gain experience, they build on more complicated skills like drug interdiction and detecting deception.  At the 5-year mark, FTO course gives the first dose of leadership experience priming them for promotion while also pollinating new officers with experiences and knowledge. 

At the seven-year mark, everyone goes to first line supervisors’ course, preparing them to be leaders before they ever put on any rank.  This idea can be kind of controversial as some people feel only supervisors should be trained to be supervisors.  That thinking is backward and sets new leaders up for failure.  At the 8-year mark, employees get to choose from a few different career tracks.  Some may favor investigative over administrative, or tactical over technical. 

The road map will look different at each organization, and it may have a menu of options to select at each milestone on the map.  The point is to always empower the employee to grow and build on their training and experience.  The transparency of knowing that the organization has already committed to an employee’s future success will go a long way to improving performance, satisfactions, and employee retention.
​
If you think something like a career roadmap would help you and your organization, Nutmeg wants to know, and we want to be your partner in developing your future successes.

Social media is a both a curse and a gift. Many people use social media to keep up with the latest trends, keep in touch with family and friends (which has become extremely important during the pandemic), and keep up with the news. For many, this is a way to stay connected, to stay in the know, and to stay involved in the lives of the ones we love.
 
For others, social media is a place to stay updated on world events. Furthermore, some use social media to communicate with the world and post their views, feelings, and theories on current events and issues important to them. This is where the danger starts.
 
Many feel that they can post with anonymity by “hiding behind their keyboard.” Others simply don’t care if they offend someone or make themselves look bad. Posting opinions is one thing, but when that opinion leads to a negative view of the writer, or even worse, the writer’s employer, the results can be devastating. Yes, you can be disciplined or fired for what you post on your personal social media accounts.
 
In general, an employer can fire an employee for almost any lawful reason, including what you post on social media. If the post or the position you take in the post is seen as offensive and the employer feels it will damage their business’ reputation, you can be disciplined or fired.
 
However, there are some protections in place. Of course, there’s the free speech angle. The problem with free speech protections is they apply to government entities and not to private employers. So, if you are employed by the government, you may have a free speech right. A person working in the private sector may not have that same protection. Other laws in place apply to both public and private employers. These laws include anti-discrimination, anti-retaliation, and whistleblower laws. Connecticut also has a prohibition against discriminating against someone based on their political affiliation. While these laws could be double-edged swords, they may be a defense if you get fired for posting something your boss doesn’t agree with.
 
In the end though, protecting yourself, your job, and your reputation requires some forward thinking. Here are a few tips to help prevent you from having to use some of the protections we spoke about above.
 
One, don’t post while upset. If something is bothering you, don’t run right to your phone or computer and start typing. Wait until you calm down and can think rationally about what you’re writing. This may prevent you from posting something you will regret later.
 
Next, don’t post something you wouldn’t want your mother or grandmother to read. If you think your mother or grandmother will find your post offensive, chances are others will too.
 
Lastly, remember, everything you post will always be out there. Even if you remove a post down the line, there is a very good chance that someone has saved the post. These posts, even if acceptable now but not in the future, have come back to ruin people’s careers. Be mindful of the fact that once something goes out onto the web, you can never fully take it back. It’s out there forever, thus can follow you forever.
 
In closing, social media can be a gift when used properly, but can get you fired or worse, when you’re not careful about what you post. I don’t want to discourage the use of social media, but if you’re going to use it, use it responsibly.
 
If you’ve been disciplined or fired because of what you posted on social media or have concerns about past posts, please give us call so we can help you work through it.

I know this won’t come as earth shattering news, but employee recognition is a critical component to a successful working environment.  Recognition can take many forms in the workplace from formal awards and bonuses to more personal methods like group praise or handwritten thank you notes. 
            This 2014 Boston Consulting Group study of more than 200,000 employees worldwide found that “Globally, the most important single job element for all people is appreciation for their work.”  Salary was ranked 8th.  Data has shown that when it comes to improving performance, nothing has a greater impact than genuine recognition and appreciation.  One such study found 83% of employees said recognition was more fulfilling than any reward or gift.  88% of employees said praise from managers was extremely motivating, and 76% said peer recognition was extremely motivating
            It seems like a no brainer that we should tell people they are doing a good job, their hard work and sacrifices are valued, and we should thank them frequently.  But we are notoriously bad at doing so effectively.  There can be many reasons for this, but researchers have deemed “Illusion of Transparency” as the likely cause.  This is where managers overestimate their displays or recognition and displays and assume that employees knew how management felt about their work.  One study found that 82% of managers prioritized recognition but 54% of employees said those same bosses could do more to recognize employees. Furthering this gap is a fear manager expressed that regular recognition would lose value or become “routinized.” 
Data shows employees do not feel this way, with the majority asking for simple things, like kind words, more frequent feedback, or options for flexibility.  A 2020 article from the Harvard Business Review advised managers to “Make it a Habit.” Appreciation is free and not time consuming, so a great recommendation is to spend the first 15 minutes of your week working on employee recognition.  Thank you cards, group shout-outs, a quick chat, sometimes even a forwarded email is enough to boost an employees morale significantly.
Making it habitual also makes it contagious.  Recognition does not just need to go from manager to employee.  It can go peer to peer and even upward to leaders, especially in trying and stressful times.  During the early stages of the Covid-19 crisis, I saw one Connecticut institution create a digital “Kudos Board” where they scanned and posted all of the positive letters, drawings, and notes they had received from the community. 
From a labor union perspective, I think recognition is important to consider.  Not only how we can better recognize the efforts of our members, but also how we can help their employers understand the value and necessity of genuine recognition. I also think how we can work collaboratively with our locals to improve recognition for their efforts in managing the many day to day challenges. If the evidence of the positive effects of recognition are so clear, why is it so rare that employers and employees collaborate on recognition programs?
If you have thoughts or ideas on how to improve recognition in the workplace, Nutmeg wants to hear from you and be your partner in improving the lives of all workers.