Select Staffing Back in the News: Cut Out Severance for Workers?

Steve Sorenson from Select Staffing is back in the bad graces of the blogosphere after Select parent company Koosharem Corp's acquisition of Walnut Creek-based Westaff for about $10.3 million in cash and perhaps $10.5 million in debt (see PacBizTimes).

I often look twice when several comments show up on a several month old post. This is from a reader on the last post about Select's response to my post about them asking if their employee's were feeling 'spunky about gay marriage':

You buy the company I work for, two days later you terminate the existing severance agreement entirely, then the day after that you start letting people go.

I trashed the link to a blog in the comments here that went into more lurid detail and invective. I'm not really interested in maligning the man's religion -- especially because there are plenty of Christians that don't follow their own values. If you are into that kind of thing you can probably find it.

If this is true -- that's kind of lame to change the severance policy and then expect your remaining employees to trust you. Yes -- we are in a recession, but that does not give one carte blanche to be an uber-capitalist (i.e. The Man).

Republicans keep on talking about socialism like its a dirty word (an inept, incorrect adjective for Democrats if I ever heard one) but they are not usually willing to say when capitalists (separate from a healthy respect for business and capitalism) come up shy of their promise. What do you think?

No on 8 Endorsement from The LA Times

You may remember my post on Select Staffing's email to employees that should scare any person who happens to be gay from ever working for them. Today I drove by Select Staffing and noticed a huge vinyl sign on the side of their building supporting Proposition 8. I wonder if they own the building or had permission? In any event, the vote will be close on that one...

If you had any hesitancy about voting no on Proposition 8, please read the LA Times endorsement of the "no" position....

Sorenson from Select Staffing Responds

Back from a relaxing vacation, I found the following presumably written by Steve Sorenson from Select Staffing -- which was posted in the comments section of a recent post. As always, I'm happy to give a venue to his civil request -- even though I don't agree with all of the reasoning herein. To be clear, he is welcome to his opinion but I am not sure the workplace is where they should be promoted!

Sara,

Hi it’s Steve Sorensen here! Since my email to our valued employees showed up on your blog, I hope you don’t mind if I respond…

I am a thirteen year resident of Santa Barbara and, as you point out, I am the Chairman and C.E.O. of Select. Select is a company founded by my family—specifically my father-in-law and sister-in-law. Over the years, I’ve had the privilege of working with many talented individuals in building Select into a $1.5 billion staffing service which provides a fast “value add” way for employers to find employees and vice versa. I note a few derogative comments on the blog about “temps”. Since the topic is Proposition 8 rather than the benefits of staffing to the economy—I won’t debate the issue here. But, I will note that we found a job for over 300,000 people last year.

And yes, undoubtedly we have valued recruiters among our 1,500 trusted employees who are gay or lesbian. Without question, many of the people for whom we have found jobs are gay or lesbian. I don’t have specific statistics because we don’t attempt to identify sexual preference. I mention it because contrary to what is suggested by your posting—I am not “anti-gay”. In fact, I appreciate the tireless and talented effort offered up by our gay and lesbian colleagues and temporary associates. Furthermore, I am not mounting an effort to reverse domestic partnership rights (already established in California) regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, probate rights, etc.

However, I am very “pro-family”! And I feel a strong moral duty to promote traditional family values.

Notwithstanding our business successes, my greatest accomplishment in life—without qualification—is the joyous and fruitful 26 years I’ve achieved in successful marriage to my wife Shannon. Together, we’ve been blessed with 8 wonderful children. And as a family we share a love that brings harmony, satisfaction and prosperity.

Indeed whatever successes in life I may have achieved so far, including any economic, educational, and spiritual achievements, have primarily been made possible by the love and support of either my wonderful wife and children or my incredible parents or my wife’s incredible parents.

I believe every child deserves a mother and a father. I realize this may not be achievable in all circumstances. But it is the ideal. The love of a mother and the love of a father are each unique, powerful, and sacred. To suggest a child will not benefit from both, or does not need both, is beyond the dictates of my conscience.

There is an old adage which states blood is thicker than water. Blood relations carry a powerful genetic and spiritual link which cannot be denied—and cannot be replicated without a man and a woman.

I feel strongly that it is our duty as citizens to make sure our common law reflects this ideal. And I feel strongly that we cannot allow those who put their own interests above the interests of children to obfuscate what is ideal.

Proposition 8 assures clarity. If it passes, our public school curriculum will be protected from having to be modified to teach something other than the ideal. Our churches—including mine—will be protected from being forced to consummate gay or lesbian marriages. Our civil practices will be protected from confusion. Most importantly, as a society, we will maintain the strength to direct our citizens towards a code of conduct that assures the sanctity of our families.

Society benefits from having the correct goal or ideal to aspire to: Family with a Mom and a Dad. I try every day to reach my potential as a father, as a son, and as a husband to my beautiful wife. I want us, as a society, to strive to maintain these ideals.

In closing, your charges of “electioneering” seem somewhat heavy-handed. Have you also taken Pacific Gas and Electric to task for their $250,000 contribution and official endorsement of No on Prop. 8? Or McDonalds for their large donation and press release? I hope not. I cherish free speech. I cherish my right to speak out. And I cherish my ability to do my part to influence public opinion. I also respect and cherish yours, and PG&E’s and McDonald’s! I hope we can discuss and debate this important issue as fellow citizens and stakeholders in the future of our great country.

Feeling 'Spunky' About Gay Marriage? Select Staffing's CEO does...what was he thinking?

Imagine you are sitting at your desk at work and you get the following email from your CEO -- this may or may not be against the law per se as it involves a proposition and not a partisan candidate or political party. Still, is a request to gather in your company parking lot not electioneering in the workplace? The above image as a PDF attachment(click to enlarge) was one of several allegedly sent with the email below according to a reader who wishes to remain anonymous...

A little background -- Steve Sorenson is the CEO for Select Staffing. The "brother Paul" mentioned in the email is actually his brother who is the President of Select...keep in mind that this is a national staffing company with over 300 offices and franchises across the country.

So, if "you are feeling spunky about it" -- you know where to be tomorrow morning. And, if you think this is homophobia or a violation of election law, you DO have license to say so herein. Most of all, how would your gay and lesbian employees feel after seeing this email?

--Sara

Santa Barbara Corporate Colleagues:

We have an election coming up!

Those of you who have been with us for a while know that I enjoy sharing my political preferences—along with my political logic—in hopes that I'll stir up some enthusiasm for us all to participate in the process.

This season is no exception! And, as November 4th approaches, you can count on me for my famous (or infamous) voter guide.

HOWEVER—IN ADDITION—this season there is an item on the ballot that is of such great importance that I'm going to be investing significantly more of my personal time and effort to "get out the vote" in a way that will shape the moral climate of our State!

The subject is—The DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE.

The Proposition is PROPOSITION 8.

The Position I'm promoting is a vote FOR proposition 8 (that's YES on 8).

Proposition 8 creates an Amendment to our State Constitution that clearly defines marriage as a union between a woman and a man.

Opponents of Proposition 8 feel that same sex unions or domestic partnerships should be legitimized by the state.

Select Veterans will recall my enthusiastic effort to pass Proposition 22 back in the year 2000. Proposition 22 also specifically defined marriage to be between a man and a woman, and was designed to preclude state officials from granting State sanction to same sex unions. While slightly controversial (ok—it wound up to be a bit of a firestorm), it turned out we were "on the side of the people" in that one. Prop. 22 passed with a powerful majority.

So why is this controversial topic back? Because our Calilfornia State Supreme Court declared Proposition 22 to be unconstitutional. Those of us who get uptight about this sort of judicial behavior refer to this as "legislating from the bench". The judges see what the people want—but decide they have the power and the duty to deprive them of it. So, in spite of an overwhelming public majority declaring same sex marriage to be "out of bounds", the courts have decided to "let it go". As a result, California is presently one of two States in the United States that is allowing same sex marriage.

Proposition 8 is intended to give the Judges clarity—and establish a firm law that they must enforce. There will be no question. Marriage will be preserved as a union between a woman and a man. Period.

Every once in a while, we get the chance to vote on an issue that will shape the moral foundation of our society. This is one of those chances.

It is SO BIG, that I'm going to do more than just "recommend" you vote in favor of Proposition 8. I'm going to ask you to come join me in a grass roots campaign to support Proposition 8.

I've attached 3 documents that hit the highlights of the issue.

If you feel so inclined, here's how you can get involved: A large group of volunteers are canvassing the Santa Barbara area to identify Prop 8 supporters and help them get out the vote! We'll be meeting this Saturday at 8:30AM in two locations: One group will be meeting right here in our Select parking lot, and one group will be meeting at the San Marcos High School parking lot (that's where Paul and I will be--near the tennis courts).

My brother Paul is heading up many of the efforts in Santa Barbara . If you are interested in coming this Saturday (or any day), please send him an email and he'll ensure that you are signed up!

Of course, this is NOT a requirement of your job. There is no job security risk or reward associated with these efforts.

This is also NOT an invitation to initiate an email campaign of your own—as the owner and C.E.O., I enjoy a few perks of privilege—being able to communicate with you in this fashion is one of them. Please don't use my solicitation as some sort of license to turn our email system into a blog. I've asked our email administrators to help avoid that outcome.

If you aren't registered to vote, we would like to help you get registered. Paul has the materials, and he would be pleased to assist you.

I hope you will vote FOR proposition 8. I hope you will tell your family and friends to vote FOR proposition 8 as well. And if you're feeling spunky about it, I hope you will join us this weekend for our first Precinct Walk and come find out how to get involved!