"If you insist on conducting performance appraisals, avoid subjective statements like, 'she's a team player,' or 'he's always available when we need him,'" advised attorney Tom Luetkemeyer, at a meeting of Human Resource Directors and small association CEOs, today at Association Forum of Chicagoland.

He suggested that supervisors who use numeric evaluations be forced to cite specific examples of employee performance that they rated above or below "satisfactory."

(Interesting note: CEOs are generally reviewed in a more subjective manner than are lower level employees. Yet, CEO reviews are usually more accurate in assessing performance and more helpful at directing employee behavior).

Luetkemeyer also suggested that employees who use Facebook to vet applicants (he neither supported nor opposed the practice) utilize two people to review social media data. He recommended a researcher view the site and then pass on legally relevant information to a decision-maker.

That way, the decision-maker will not be privy to information that has no bearing on the applicant's qualifications or that would give the applicant grounds for suing the employer for discrimination if not hired.

Additionally, Mary Lynn Fayoumi, CEO of The Management Association of Illinois, reported that Human Resource Directors (who are often thought of as company "police") refrain from using social media at work, although they use it extensively in their personal lives.

Many feel they must set an example at the office, since they may have to discipline employees who use company time and equipment for personal visits to social media sites.

Workers in their 30s and 40s may grouse about those ahead of them hanging onto their jobs. Younger folks may have expected to move up a bit more quickly.

Well, people of all ages have had to change their expectations. Workers in their 50s and 60s may have expected a comfortable retirement. That is no longer realistic for many.

A study by the Employee Benefit Research Institute estimates that nearly half of all baby boomers will run out of money before they die (that may also be true for following generations - we'll see).

Young association executives eagerly awaiting the retirement of their predecessors will have to wait a lot longer. Here's why:

1. People live longer, healthier lives than in the past and will want to continue working.

2. Many not-for-profit employees have not earned enough money - and never will - to save for a comfortable, or even a less affluent, retirement. They'll have to stay healthy and continue working - indefinitely.

3. The current recession decimated lots of savings and people nearing the end of their careers have no chance to replace lost funds. So, they'll just keep working in the same jobs they've had (if they are lucky enough to still have them).

4. Many people, even those who saved for retirement, haven't saved enough and have no choice but to continue working.

5. The highly paid association executives touted in industry publications are not typical of the profession. Most association employees will never earn six-figure incomes. Additionally, mortgages, college tuitions, health care expenses, and other necessities have limited their ability to save. They'll keep working, if they can.

6. Folks in their 60s and 70s are not looking for part-time, "second" careers. They are still working in their first careers and don't plan to stop.

Expectations always have to change.

I just learned that a colleague (an Executive Director) was fired. She was rushed out of the office without even being given the opportunity to say good bye to her staff.

Not only is that a crappy way to terminate a person, it leaves a bad feeling in the office.

If you have to fire somebody, do it humanely.

There's a buzz on the ASAE Executive Listserv about an expected U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) crackdown on the misuse of student interns.

In business, interns are trainees. They are salaried and, if they perform well, will be offered permanent positions.

In not-for-profit organizations, interns are participating in an instructional experience. They are usually not paid and rarely expect employment at the association when their internships are completed.

DOL thinks that many of these interns are being exploited by performing work, rather than receiving instruction. It believes that many organizations are avoiding salary payments (and payroll taxes) and are treating interns as free labor.

An internship experience should be designed for the benefit of the intern, not the association.

Here are DOL criteria to determine whether a person is an intern or an employee, and suggestions for crafting successful internship programs.

The U.S. Congress and the Illinois State Legislature are considering bills to prohibit the use of credit checks for employment applications.

It's about time. I've never conducted a credit check on a potential employee because it has no relevance to the applicant's qualifications for the job.

Most people conduct their personal affairs differently than their professional duties. Especially now, many people have depleted their savings, maxed out credit cards, and paid their bills late. Most people carry substantial debt.

That doesn't make them potential thieves. And it doesn't mean they'll handle association finances poorly.

Misappropriation of financial resources can be committed by anybody - even wealthy, financially secure professionals. A credit check won't identify those people. It will just penalize those who have already been victimized by the economy.

Swedish Covenant Hospital, in Chicago, paid employees for lost wages caused by a recent salary freeze. How many companies have done that?

"If people are your most important assets, why would you get rid of them?" asks the former head of human resources for Southwest, the largest domestic U.S. airline, and the only one that did not downsize after 9/11.

Compassionate executives will do their best to preserve jobs while searching for other ways to weather financial adversity (they'll cut marketing, instead). Practical executives will say that salaries consume the lion's share of expenses, so any cuts will have to include personnel.

The real problem, though, is not whether or not to lay off employees. The problem is that some companies treat layoffs as a tool to maximize profits. They think it will increase company value, even if a workforce reduction is not necessary.

What they don't realize (or refuse to realize) is that, besides being inhumane, that strategy does not work.

Sue Pelletier reported on a Boston Globe article that predicted how companies of the future might operate with mostly freelancers instead of employees.

Many people who currently work as consultants may think that's just fine. It's their preferred work arrangement, anyway. But associations may want to think twice before adopting that model.

1. It's bad for members. As technology makes it easier (for better or worse) to contact people instantly, an association peopled by freelancers may actually yield longer response times for members.

Members, like most people, expect immediate responses to their inquiries. Many contact the association at the last minute (which they really shouldn't do) and expect their concerns to be handled promptly.

Freelancers may not always be available when members want them.

Freelancers won't work at HQ, so members who contact the office will have to leave messages for them, have their calls relayed to remote offices, or call freelancers (or are they vendors?) directly. Emails may be delayed if first intercepted by headquarters. Transfering calls from one "worker" to another may take more time.

2. It's bad for freelancers. They will likely be treated as contractual workers, not as consultants. They'll be paid at salaried levels or less (probably less) with no benefits. They'll have to purchase their own health and liability insurance, so their net pay will be even lower.

Since freelancers will likely earn their livelihoods by working for multiple employers (clients, actually), they'll have to apply for jobs all of the time. Most people are not accustomed to doing that and aren't very good at it. They are not entrepreneurs or marketers.

If freelancers secure long-term contracts from the same associations they would normally have served as employees, they'll end up doing the same work for less pay. They won't be winning their "independence." They'll just be getting cheated.

3. It's bad for associations. A core staff will always be necessary. Sometimes that core may be only the CEO. That exec's ability to direct the association will be hampered by the absence of employees.

Freelancers will not be on-site, will not always be available, and may feel free to modify CEO directives.

The CEO will be less able to offer guarantees of timely service delivery or policy action to members or to the Board of Directors.

The association will save money, though, since it will pay freelancers less than employees, not pay any benefits, occupy smaller quarters, and own less equipment (freelancers will own their own).

But it will be more difficult to assemble a cadre of committed workers whose primary allegiance will be to the association.

So, other than business owners squeezing out more profit, who will this model benefit?

People are frequently told to follow their passion when seeking employment or creating job opportunities for themselves.

That advice is often misapplied.

Passion for a trade or profession does not equip a person to manage an association of that trade or profession.

Managing an association, for example, requires knowledge of organizational development, membership recruitment, marketing, public relations, governance, finance, law, fund-raising, personnel administration, technology, meeting planning, government affairs, strategic planning, publishing, and a whole lot more.

To succeed, you need a passion for managing, not a passion for the association's mission.

The real reason to follow your passion is that you'll need to work enthusiastically and limitlessly to achieve success. You are more likely to do that, it is presumed, for something you really care about.

So, if you have a passion for widgets, for example, find a job where you can earn a living designing, producing, utilizing, or selling them.

Leave association management to people who have a passion for association management.

Employers who spy on job applicants' Facebook pages (an unethical and irrelevant activity) might be better served following their subjects around grocery stores.

Would you hire a person who blocks the aisle with a shopping cart? That person may be self-absorbed and not aware of surroundings - a bad pick for the marketing department.

Would you hire the person behind the deli counter who shouts, "Who's next?" instead of calling for the person with the next number? This applicant may lack organizational ability.

What about the person who watches an item fall from a shelf and leaves it on the floor? Perhaps, that's an "it's not my job" kind of person.

Then there's the person who pushes a full cart into the express lane. Is that a potential employee who can't - or won't - follow directions?

And, of course, there's the person who leaves groceries in the checkout lane to dash back to the shelves and search for a forgotten item. That might reveal poor planning skills.

So, take good notes as you skulk through the aisles. And make sure your coupons are valid before you hand them to the cashier.