How California Employees Can Navigate Conflict & Respond to Workplace Aggression在加州职场,冲突虽常见,但若升级为言语、心理或身体上的攻击,员工权益和安全便受到严重威胁。本文由加州资深劳动律师 Andrea Amaya 撰写,结合丰富实务经验,为员工提供一套应对职场侵害的法律行动指南。
首先,员工需识别何为“正常摩擦”与“侵害行为”之间的界限——如果对方的行为使你感到受威胁、被羞辱、被排挤,或影响工作绩效,就不应被视为“职场常态”。其次,律师强调“记录一切”的重要性,即便是微小的不适也应及时整理证据,如保存邮件、截图聊天记录,并建立日志。
面对挑衅时,理性、专业的回应比情绪化反应更具保护力。文章建议使用明确措辞维护自身底线,并在适当时向HR正式提出书面投诉。但员工也需意识到HR并非完全中立,举报时需谨慎、留存所有记录。如担心遭遇打击报复,建议先与律师沟通。
当局势持续恶化、损害身心健康时,员工应评估是否需要寻求法律援助或考虑离职。在加州,基于歧视、骚扰或报复的侵权可向 CRD 或 EEOC 提出申诉。
作者最后提醒,职场毒性文化的存在并非员工本人的失败,勇敢维权、优先保护自己的心理健康,是专业、成熟且有力的选择。
LOS ANGELES, July 15, 2025-Conflict is part of any workplace and often unavoidable. It can look like subtle disrespect in meetings or outright hostility behind closed doors.But when conflict escalates into aggression, whether it be verbal, psychological, or even physical, and it starts threatening your dignity, safety, and career, it stops being a mere HR matter.
As an employment lawyer in California representing employees across industries, I've seen how workplace aggression, left unchecked, can erode mental health, derail careers, and silence otherwise brilliant voices.
But I've also seen how clarity, strategy, and the courage to act can turn conflict into a turning point rather than a breaking point.
Here's how California employees can navigate workplace conflict and respond to aggression in a way that's not only safe and smart, but legally informed.
1. Recognize the Difference Between Discomfort and Abuse
Not every disagreement is "hostile work environment" material. Workplaces are made up of employees with differing opinions, personalities and backgrounds. Disagreements are bound to happen. However, there is a difference between a disagreement or a misunderstanding and a toxic work environment. Many workers, especially in hierarchical or high-pressure fields, normalize toxic dynamics. If you find yourself second-guessing whether your colleague's tone, your supervisor's "jokes," or the constant exclusion from meetings are just part of the job, pause.
Ask yourself: Is this behavior isolating me, threatening me, humiliating me, or interfering with my ability to do my job?
In California, workplace aggression can cross legal lines if it includes harassment (especially if based on protected characteristics like race, gender, age, disability, etc.) or retaliation (for reporting wrongdoing, requesting medical leave, etc.). It doesn't have to be physical. Verbal attacks, threats, and sabotage count.
2. Document Everything, Even the "Small" Stuff
Legal cases aren't built on vibes; they're built on records. If a coworker publicly berates you, if your boss sends passive-aggressive emails, or if you're left out of key communications, write it down. Save the emails. Screenshot the thread. Keep a running log with dates, what happened, and who was present.
Even if you never file a formal complaint, documentation arms you with clarity and credibility. It helps HR understand patterns, not just isolated events. And if things do escalate legally, it could be the difference between "he said, she said" and a compelling, evidence-based claim.
3. Respond Strategically, Not Emotionally
It's human to want to snap back at the colleague who cuts you down in front of others. But emotional reactions can be used against you later, especially if the aggressor is angling to provoke you.
Instead, respond with professionalism. If safe, call out the behavior calmly:
"I'd prefer to be spoken to respectfully. Is there something specific you want to address?"
If you're in a meeting, redirect the conversation or note the inappropriate behavior in writing afterward. Use phrases like:
"To clarify what was said earlier…" "For the record, I'd like to note…"
Standing up for yourself may feel uncomfortable, especially if you're junior or underrepresented, but it is a crucial step to protecting your dignity.
Remember: assertiveness is not aggression. It's boundary-setting.
4. Use Your Company's Processes, But With Eyes Wide Open
HR is supposed to be a neutral party, but in practice, they often serve the company's interests. That doesn't mean you shouldn't report bad behavior. It means you should report with awareness.
When making a complaint:
Be clear, specific, and factual.
Stick to workplace impact (e.g., "This interfered with my ability to do X").
Ask for a written acknowledgment of your complaint.
Save a copy of everything you submit or receive.
In California, retaliation for complaining about unlawful behavior (discrimination, harassment, wage violations, etc.) is itself illegal. Nonetheless, retaliation by an employer is still common. If you're concerned about blowback, consult an employment lawyer before filing the complaint.
5. Know When to Escalate, And When to Exit
There comes a point when the question shifts from "Can I fix this?" to "Is this worth staying in?" That's not quitting. That's choosing yourself.
If conflict or aggression becomes chronic, or harmful to your health, or it remains unresolved, it may be time to seek outside help. In some cases, a legal letter can prompt change. In others, a claim with the California Civil Rights Department (CRD) or Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) may be appropriate.
And sometimes, the bravest and healthiest move is to walk away, with your records intact, your self-respect preserved, and legal options open. This doesn't mean you are giving up. You are simply prioritizing your mental and physical health.
You are not unprofessional for protecting your peace. And you are not alone. Take action.
Final Thoughts
If you're dealing with constant tension or subtle hostility, it's easy to internalize it as a personal failure. But much of what we call "personality conflicts" in the workplace is actually a failure of culture and leadership. Especially for employees from marginalized communities, navigating workplace aggression can feel like an invisible second job.
Recognize when a situation is harmful. Leaving a workplace that no longer suits you is not a sign of weakness. While workplace aggression can make you feel powerless, remember that you have the power to control the outcome.
You don't need to be loud to stand up for yourself. You just need to be strategic, supported, and unshakably clear on your worth. The law, when understood and applied, is a powerful ally.
Contact D.Law by calling (818) 875-2008 or send a message with any questions or concerns you may have regarding your employment rights. Our attorneys are experts in California employment law and worker's rights and can help you with the problems you are faced with.
-By Andrea Amaya, Associate Attorney, D.Law
Josh Bersin:Digital Twins, Digital Employees, And Agents Everywhere2025 年,数字员工和人工智能助理的崛起将彻底改变人力资源运营,改变招聘、数据分析和员工管理等任务。 这些技术包括数字双胞胎和智能代理,它们将与人类专业人员一起工作,以提高生产力和优化工作流程。 随着人工智能工具成为日常业务不可或缺的一部分,人力资源领导者必须拥抱这些创新,同时继续关注技能培训、心理健康和包容性工作环境。 向人工智能的转变还将重塑团队动态,这对人力资源部门重新设计角色和流程以保持竞争力提出了挑战。
I recently heard Elon Musk predict that every citizen would have multiple Optimus robots in their homes within five years. And while I often ignore his predictions because they’re exaggerated, I think he’s on to something. We are about to witness an explosion of Digital Employees in our companies, and these may be the “robots” we’ve heard about for years.
Let me explain. This week I talked with dozens of vendors and clients at Unleash and then visited our development partner Sana Labs in Stockholm. It’s now clear that we’re going to be working with multitudes of “digital employees” in the year ahead.
(And as Dario Amodei, the founder of Anthropic explains, AI can do many more positive things in business, science, and health than we ever imagined.)
By “digital employee” I mean a software powered agent that can talk with us, answer detailed questions, solve complex analytic problems, and navigate a multitude of systems. ChatGPT and its peers, which introduced the idea of an agent, has now spawned dozens of “agentic” use cases, which I’d be willing to refer to as personalities.
Let me start with a “Digital Twin.” Imagine you have a superb customer service agent with years of experience helping your most demanding clients. If you load the last five years of their emails, coupled with all their internal documentation, and a log history of their last two years of service calls, you can essentially “create him or her” digitally with all the knowledge, style, and internal contacts this person has developed. This twin, which may look initially like an AI assistant, could then carry on this employee’s work when the real life worker is on vacation.
One of our clients, a large insurance company, has already built “digital twins” for claims processing. If you think about the complexity and workflow of processing a claim, much of it could be learned by an agent, making the “claims robot” an expert on this important process. And as you change claims rules and limits, the agent will learn new guidelines in only seconds.
Our AI assistant Galileo, a trained expert on HR (Galileo is trained on 25 years of research and thousands of conversations with clients and vendors), is essentially a “digital twin” of me and the other analysts in our firm. I’m not saying Galileo is as fun to talk with as we are, but I can assure you that he (or she) is as knowledgeable and supportive. And Galileo is even smarter than I am: he has instant knowledge of skills models, compensation benchmarks, turnover statistics, and other data bases which I can only access by looking them up on demand.
And using the Sana platform we can configure Galileo to have multiple personalities. Galileo the “Recruitment Agent” might have in-depth knowledge of screening, interviewing, and candidate skills assessment and he may have direct linkage to SeekOut, Eightfold, or any other sourcing applications. In his candidate facing personality he may be able to answer candidate questions, explain shift schedules, and “sell” the company to top job candidates. (This is what Paradox has done for years and vendors like Eightfold and LinkedIn are launching now.)
But there’s more. Imagine that this “digital twin” or “digital employee” has intimate knowledge of Workday, SuccessFactors, or a variety of other systems. Now the assistant can not only answer questions and help solve problems, he can also process transactions, look things up, and run reports against multiple system. The digital employee has turned into a “digital analyst,” who can find things and do work for you, saving you hours of effort in your daily life. (Vee from Visier is designed for this.)
Suppose you ask your digital friend to attend meetings for you, participate in conversations on certain topics, and alert you in real time when urgent issues come up for discussion. He could help you scale your time, keep you informed about decisions you need to know about, and help you manage your action items. And the list goes on and on and on.
Best of all, what if your digital twin can talk to you. Suppose he “checks in” with you about the project you asked for help with last week, so you inform him how things are going and he gets “smarter” about what you may need next. Galileo does this today, prompting you to dig into a problem and explore areas you may not have considered. And if you ask him about management or people issues, he could give you advice and coaching, based on the leadership models or even CEO interviews in your own company. (BetterUp, Valence and others are working on this.)
This is not science fiction, my friends. All this is becoming reality and will certainly be common next year.
Every vendor has a slightly different focus. The Microsoft Copilot specializes in MS Office-related activities, ServiceNow’s focuses on internal service and support, Galileo is focused on the needs of HR, and Joule is an expert on all the functions of SAP. Each of these “digital employees” needs training, feedback, and connections to stay current and relevant. So it’s doubtful that one digital employee will do everything. (Training a digital employee means managing his or her corpus of information, which will be a major new role in HR.)
One thing is very clear: we are going to be living and working with these guys. And as we use them and see what they’re capable of, we’re going to redesign work. Little by little we’ll offload tasks, projects, and workflows. And as we do, we’ll get smarter and smarter about redesigning our teams.
I liken the process to that of a carpenter who gets a new multi-function power drill. Before the drill he may have manually drilled holes, carefully selecting the drill bit and the level of pressure based on wood density. Now he drills holes faster, more accurately, and with more precision. Soon he just speeds through the process, spending more time on cabinet fit, finish, or design.
The same thing will happen to our HR tasks, projects, and designs. And these new digital employees are programmable! So once we figure out what they’re capable of we can adjust them, customize them, and connect them together. Eventually we’ll have intelligent assistants that operate as entire applications. And that’s the threat to incumbent software companies – the agents hollow out many of our existing applications.
How Do Our Digital Employees Impact Our Own Work?
One more observation. Many a few of the clients I talked with kept asking “what about our softskills?” What work is truly human?
I think that’s the wrong question. Rather we should ask the opposite: how much can I delegate to my new friends as fast as possible!
Have you been upset that your vacuum cleaner took away the rewarding human work of sweeping a floor? How much joy do you get from washing dishes? Did your dishwasher make you feel deflated when you stopped splashing around in the soapy water?
Of course not – these tools eliminated tasks we considered to be “drudgery.”
Well today, thanks to digital assistants, creating a pivot table to do cross-tab analysis has become drudgery. You can stop getting your hands wet with that task – ask Galileo or Copilot to analyze the data, and then ask him to chart it, add more data, and try new assumptions. The more we learn to use these new digital employees the more “drudgery” we can stop doing.
And consider complex “human-centered” activities like “change management.” A client asked me “how could Galileo help me with change management for our new HCM system?”
I answered her with dozens of ideas: ask Galileo for case studies of other companies and have it build a checklist to consider based on what other companies did. Then ask Galileo to build a training plan; ask it to read the user documentation and create a table of what features are new; then ask Galileo to rewrite that change plan by role. And finally ask Galileo to write a press release about success, craft some compelling communications to employees, and ask it to compute the ROI of all the steps eliminated.
These are all “manual” human tasks we do today and they take time and ingenuity to figure out. If you went through this process in Galileo you could ask your digital employee to save these steps and prompts in a “template,” and you have just taught your digital employee how to do change management. The next time you need him he can step you through the process.
As I started to explain this to my client I stopped and said: wait a minute. I can’t possibly show you everything Galileo can do. You have to try it for yourself.
And that’s my big message. Don’t wait for a vendor to drop a finished solution in your lap. These are intelligent, trainable, digital experts. You have to get to know them so you can figure out where they fit in your job, your projects, and your company. Just like you do with any new hire.
I say it’s time to get started. No more sweeping floors or washing dishes by hand. Let’s meet our digital employees, tell them about our projects, and ask for their help. Step by step, day by day, we can redesign our jobs to be more more productive, liberating us to do greater things.
美国公民自由联盟对Aon人工智能招聘工具发起投诉美国公民自由联盟(ACLU)于2024年6月6日向美国联邦贸易委员会提交了针对Aon的投诉,挑战其候选人评估工具的合法性和偏见问题。ACLU指控Aon的评估工具,如Adept-15人格测试和vidAssess-AI视频评估工具,在市场上虚假宣称“无偏见”并能“增进多样性”,实际上这些工具可能基于种族和残疾(如自闭症和心理健康障碍)歧视求职者。此外,ACLU还提到,Aon的gridChallenge认知能力评估也显示出种族表现上的差异。针对这些指控,Aon回应称其评估工具遵循行业最佳实践和EEOC、法律及专业指导原则。ACLU此举揭示了在职场包容性与合规性之间的紧张关系,呼吁更严格审查这些广泛使用的人力资源技术工具。
在人力资源技术迅速发展的世界中,人工智能(AI)扮演着关键角色,承诺将简化流程并增强招聘实践的效率。然而,AI整合到这些实践中经常引发关于公平性和歧视的重大争议。最近的一个例子涉及到全球专业服务公司Aon,该公司的AI驱动的招聘评估工具因美国公民自由联盟(ACLU)的指控而受到审查。ACLU向美国联邦贸易委员会(FTC)正式投诉Aon,突显了关于AI在招聘中应用的重要对话。
ACLU投诉的基础
ACLU指控Aon欺骗性地营销其招聘评估工具——特别是Adept-15性格评估、vidAssess-AI视频面试工具和gridChallenge认知能力测试——这些工具被宣称为无偏见并有助于提高工作场所的多样性。根据ACLU的说法,这些声明不仅具有误导性,而且可能违法,因为这些工具可能会基于种族和残疾(如自闭症、抑郁症和焦虑症)歧视求职者。这些工具使用算法和AI进行评估,根据候选人的积极性、情感意识和活力等特征进行评估,这些特征往往与工作表现无直接关联,且可能对某些残疾人群产生不成比例的影响。
Aon的辩护和行业实践
面对ACLU的指控,Aon为其产品辩护,声称这些工具是根据法律和专业指南(包括平等就业机会委员会EEOC设定的指南)设计的。Aon强调他们的工具是雇主用于做出更具包容性招聘决策的更广泛评估工具集的一部分。此外,Aon还指出其工具的效率和成本效益,认为这些工具比传统方法更少歧视性。
法律和道德含义
这场争议引发了关于使用AI进行就业的重要法律和道德问题。美国的法律,包括美国残疾人法案(ADA)和民权法案第七章,要求就业中的非歧视实践,涵盖从招聘到工作场所的所有方面。ACLU向FTC的投诉不仅提示可能违反这些法律,还将问题框定为不仅是就业歧视,还涉及消费者欺诈的问题。
更广泛的行业关注
ACLU对Aon的行动是更广泛运动的一部分,旨在审查用于招聘的AI工具。批评者认为,虽然这些技术提供了无偏见决策的潜力,但它们常常缺乏透明度,并可能无意中编码了其开发者或它们所训练的数据集的偏见。这一问题由于这些工具的专有性质而变得更加复杂,这阻碍了对它们的公平性和效率进行彻底的公众评估。
潜在后果和改革
ACLU对Aon的投诸可能对人力资源技术行业产生深远影响。如果FTC决定调查或制裁Aon,可能会导致对AI在招聘中的使用进行更严格的监管,可能为整个行业中类似工具的市场营销和实施设定先例。对依赖这些工具的公司而言,此案可能是重新评估其算法以确保符合反歧视法律的关键提示。
此外,此案凸显了技术专家、法律专家、政策制定者和民权倡导者之间需要进行持续对话的需求,以确保AI的进步能够增强而非破坏工作场所的平等。随着AI继续渗透到各种人力资源方面,制定维护反歧视和坚持道德原则的标准和最佳实践将至关重要。
结论
ACLU对Aon的投诉提醒我们在AI时代,创新、监管和权利之间的复杂相互作用。虽然AI为HR提供了变革的潜力,但它也需要谨慎处理以防止新形式的歧视。这个案例可能会成为AI在招聘伦理辩论中的一个里程碑,促使所有利益相关者考虑其技术选择的更广泛影响。随着法律程序的展开,人力资源技术行业将密切关注,意识到AI在招聘中的未来现在受到更审慎的公众和法律审视。
Unveiling Bias: The Controversy Over Aon's AI Hiring Tools and the ACLU's Challenge
In the rapidly evolving world of human resources technology, artificial intelligence (AI) plays a pivotal role, promising to streamline processes and enhance the efficiency of hiring practices. However, the integration of AI into these practices often sparks significant debate regarding fairness and discrimination. A recent example of this controversy involves Aon, a global professional services firm, whose AI-driven hiring assessment tools have come under scrutiny by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The ACLU's allegations against Aon, leading to a formal complaint to the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), underline a critical dialogue about the implications of AI in hiring.
The Basis of the ACLU’s Complaint
The ACLU has accused Aon of deceptively marketing its hiring assessment tools — specifically the Adept-15 personality assessment, the vidAssess-AI video interviewing tool, and the gridChallenge cognitive ability test — as bias-free and conducive to improving diversity in the workplace. According to the ACLU, these claims are not only misleading but also potentially unlawful, as the tools may perpetuate discrimination against job seekers based on race and disabilities such as autism, depression, and anxiety. These tools, which utilize algorithmic processes and AI, are said to evaluate candidates on traits like positivity, emotional awareness, and liveliness, which are often not directly relevant to job performance and may disproportionately affect individuals with certain disabilities.
Aon’s Defense and Industry Practices
In response to the ACLU's claims, Aon has defended its products by asserting that they are designed in compliance with legal and professional guidelines, including those set forth by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Aon emphasizes that their tools are part of a broader array of assessments used by employers to make more inclusive hiring decisions. Moreover, Aon points to the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of their tools, arguing that they are less discriminatory than traditional methods.
Legal and Ethical Implications
The controversy raises significant legal and ethical questions about the use of AI in employment. U.S. laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, mandate non-discriminatory practices in employment, covering all aspects from hiring to workplace accommodation. The ACLU's complaint to the FTC, an agency tasked with protecting America’s consumers and competition, suggests potential violations of these laws, framing the issue not only as one of employment discrimination but also of consumer deception.
Broader Industry Concerns
The ACLU's actions against Aon are part of a larger movement to scrutinize AI tools used for hiring. Critics argue that while these technologies offer the potential for unbiased decision-making, they often lack transparency and can inadvertently encode the biases of their developers or the data sets they are trained on. This issue is compounded by the proprietary nature of these tools, which prevents a thorough public assessment of their fairness and effectiveness.
Potential Repercussions and Reforms
The outcome of the ACLU’s complaint could have far-reaching implications for the HR technology industry. A decision by the FTC to investigate or sanction Aon could lead to more stringent regulations governing the development and use of AI in hiring, potentially setting a precedent for how similar tools are marketed and implemented across the industry. For companies that rely on these tools, the case may serve as a critical prompt to reevaluate their algorithms to ensure compliance with anti-discrimination laws.
Moreover, this case highlights the need for ongoing dialogue between technologists, legal experts, policymakers, and civil rights advocates to ensure that advancements in AI serve to enhance, rather than undermine, workplace equality. As AI continues to permeate various aspects of human resources, the development of standards and best practices that safeguard against discrimination and uphold ethical principles will be crucial.
Conclusion
The ACLU's complaint against Aon is a reminder of the complex interplay between innovation, regulation, and rights in the age of AI. While AI offers transformative potentials for HR, it also demands a cautious approach to prevent new forms of discrimination. This case may well become a landmark in the ongoing debate over AI ethics in hiring, urging all stakeholders to consider the broader implications of their technological choices. As the legal proceedings unfold, the HR technology industry will be watching closely, aware that the future of AI in hiring is now under a more discerning public and legal microscope.
Mental Health
2024年06月06日
Mental Health
应对心理健康危机:42%的公司计划推出新的员工福利
根据The Conference Board的最新报告,尽管HR领导们对劳动力市场的乐观程度略有上升,但员工保留和参与度的预期与去年相比有所下降,显示出劳动力短缺的持续问题。报告揭示,随着员工心理健康问题的加剧,42%的公司计划今年提供新的福祉福利。企业承认对员工福祉负有责任,并在增加对健康项目的关注和支出方面取得了显著进展。报告强调,全面考虑员工福祉不仅可以提高员工参与度和生产力,还能保留人才。
Tackling the Mental Health Crisis: 42% of Companies Plan to Offer New Employee Well-Being Benefits
NEW YORK, March 22, 2024 -- Corporate America's HR leaders continue to be more optimistic than pessimistic about the state of the workforce.
The Conference Board CHRO Confidence Index ticked up to 54 in Q1, from 53 last quarter. (A reading of more than 50 points reflects more positive than negative responses.) While retention and engagement expectations improved from last quarter, the survey reveals they are down compared to this time last year, signaling ongoing concerns about labor shortages. Hiring expectations remained stable.
The survey also reveals that businesses are stepping up as mental health concerns continue taking a toll on workers throughout the nation: 42% of surveyed companies plan to offer new well-being benefits this year.
Indeed, 36% say businesses are responsible for the well-being of their employees, with another 62% saying they are somewhat responsible. As a result, they are ramping up their focus on employee wellness: In addition to those offering new well-being benefits, a quarter plan to increase spending on well-being initiatives.
"Taking a holistic view of worker well-being can not only improve employee engagement and productivity but also retain your talent—a top focus of both CEOs and CHROs this year," said Diana Scott, Leader of The Conference Board US Human Capital Center.
The Index, conducted quarterly, was launched in Q1 2023 and is comprised of three components—hiring, retention, and engagement—as well as special questions included in each survey. Nearly 150 CHROs participated in the Q1 survey, which included additional questions on employee well-being. Key findings include:
Hiring The CHRO Confidence Index: Hiring component remained the same as both last quarter and YoY, at 55.
CHROs' workforce expansion plans remained stable in Q1, with fewer CHROs expecting to increase or decrease hiring in the next six months:
36% of CHROs expect to increase their hiring over the next six months—down from 44% in Q4.
13% expect to decrease their hiring over the next six months—down from 19% in Q4.
Retention The CHRO Confidence Index: Retention component rose to 53 in Q1 2024 from 51 in Q4 2023. But retention expectations are down YoY from 57 in Q1 2023.
CHRO expectations regarding employee retention ticked up slightly in Q1:
29% of CHROs expect their employee retention levels to improve over the next six months—up slightly from 28% in Q4.
19% of CHROs expect employee retention to decrease over the next six months, down from 22% in Q4.
Engagement The CHRO Confidence Index: Engagement component rose to 54 in Q1 2024 from 52 in Q4 2023. But engagement expectations are down YoY from 58 in Q1 2023.
Fewer CHROs expect declines in employee engagement in Q1:
35% expect engagement levels to increase—down slightly from 37% in Q4.
20% expect engagement levels to decrease—down significantly from 31% in Q4.
Special Questions for Q4: Employee Well-Being For Q1 2024, the Index also surveyed CHROs on employee well-being.
CHROs overwhelmingly agree that organizations share responsibility for their employees' well-being.
62% said organizations are somewhat responsible.
36% said organizations are responsible.
Only 2% said organizations are not responsible for employee well-being.
A quarter of CHROs increased spending on employee well-being in 2024.
26% said their well-being budget increased for FY2024.
69% said it remained the same.
Only 5% decreased spending on well-being.
Nearly half of CHROs plan to offer new well-being benefits, despite most keeping spending the same.
42% plan to offer new benefits this year.
39% do not plan to offer new benefits.
19% are discussing offering new benefits.
Mental and physical health are the top priorities for new well-being initiatives.
Of those offering new benefits:
20% are offering mental health initiatives.
15% are offering physical health and fitness initiatives.
12% are offering financial well-being initiatives.
10% are offering work-life balance initiatives.
About The Conference BoardThe Conference Board is the member-driven think tank that delivers trusted insights for what's ahead. Founded in 1916, we are a non-partisan, not-for-profit entity holding 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt status in the United States. www.conference-board.org
SOURCE The Conference Board