ON THE JOB PROBATIONARY PERIODS SHOULD BE FLEXIBLE

Most companies have a probationary period of one sort or another whereas the new employee entering the organization must be on his or her best behavior. Often times this period lasts 60 or 90 days from the date of hire. It, in effect, allows the company to see attributes or qualities demonstrated in real that were discussed during the hiring process. I'm fine with this kind of a policy. Anyone can say anything they want to get through an interview. Ultimately, the proof is in the pudding, and this is the employee's time to shine.

The difficulty occurs when certain companies take this policy to the extreme. Everyone knows its crunch time. Everyone knows you can't miss a beat. But how much does a company's management have to hang this period over the new hire's head? How much fear does a company need to impart on the new hire? What considerations should be made when the probationary period has ended to truly determine whether or not the employee is a suitable candidate for permanent employment?

Ultimately, I think the entire period should be based on character and merit, and on the new hire's demonstrated ability to perform the job that he's been hired for. That's what the policy's function should be. I think that's really the intention of most probationary policies.

Yes, the new employee should be timely in his work, be on time, and be professional in every way. Yes, the new employee is on probation and should be keenly aware that he's not yet a permanent fixture on the company's payroll. But companies should be equally aware of the nature of life and its certain unpredictability. It's not necessarily what happens, but what you do when it happens.

What if a close family member dies? What if the new hire has an auto accident? Should the employee be forced to decide whether his job is more important than a family member's memorial? Should a company decide that an accident is grounds for dismissal because the employee ultimately couldn't show up to work because he or she is lying in a hospital recovering? What if the new hire's car breaks down unexpectedly (of course, when do we expect it, right?), but he or she follows a professional path to inform the right people of the situation and makes every effort to still report to work—albeit late?

What I believe should be most important in all probationary policy, and frankly any policy in the workplace, is flexibility. The reality is that most managers tell an interviewee during the interview process that, "We are looking for someone able to be flexible, to be able to adapt to varying situations, and to be able to offer creative solutions to problems and situations that may arise throughout the workday."

I highlight words like flexible and adapt and creative because all of them lack one thing in common. Rigidity. A policy, like an expectation held to the employee it ultimately affects, should not be so rigid that it cannot address real situations that people may encounter in everyday life—even when that person is on their 90 days! Things happen. Situations arise. We deal with them. We adapt to them. We have to. That's the nature of life.

To anyone hiring someone today or currently administering a probationary policy, keep this message in mind. People seek jobs to work. They seek jobs to provide a living for themselves and maintain a good qualify of life for their families. Fear is never a good way to motivate a new hire to do good for the company. And when you are a company who strictly enforces a policy like a probationary one, heedless of uncontrollable circumstances that a new hire may sometimes have to deal with, even when he or she deals with them in a courteous, honest, and professional manner, you can't also honestly believe our employees are our most important asset is a statement that holds any water. Most important, don't forget you were once a new employee as well.

IT'S SCISSOR TIME AGAIN

It comes around every so often for all of us. You break out the scissors having concluded that it's time, once again, to cut up those credit cards weighing down your wallet. And each and every time we do it, it's always a wise decision. If that's not where you're at right now, maybe you should be.

Despite all of the rhetoric spouted off in fancy TV, magazine and Internet ads about all the financial freedom credit can provide to buy what you want, and do what you want, the truth is that credit cards are the enemy. In reality, they are really destroyers of financial gain and freedom. They'll cripple you long before they'll help you along to any happy goal.

Another problem with them is that credit cards also send out false economic indicators that consumers have real money to spend. That consumers have real money to cover the debts they rack up with them. The recession we're in now is proof enough that that was far from the case. During the boom people were using new debt to pay off old debt, and so went the vicious cycle. Our time was as borrowed as the money we were using to buy a bunch of crap we really didn't need anyway (most of it made in China, mind you).

At the end of the day credit cards are akin to horrible, taloned monsters that lurk deep in the shadows, lying in wait sneering just at the brink of eye shot, with their deviant little bag of tricks ever at the ready. Like all monsters, they thrive best when you can't see them. When you just barely know that they are there. Jumping out and yelling "boo!" is not only easy stuff. It's a dead ringer. Monsters rather relish in taking little bits of you until finally, one day, they've got you but good.

My wife and I are again credit card free. We've done the scissor deed. The little plastic bits have been banished to the local landfill, maybe even this time for good. Granted, that's not to say that we're debt free. We still have the balances to pay back. But the ability to access the credit we were able to before has heretofore been removed from the equation. The option to use the credit is no longer in the cards, if you'll pardon my pun.

Part of what made the decision for us, is that the credit card companies have suddenly decided to punish everyone for the credit crunch. They've decided it's now up to us, the consumer, to pay for mistakes that they (the banks—and oh yeah, that bozo Barney Frank too) have made by arbitrarily increasing interest rates, adding on fees, and changing the overall terms as to how they'll apply your payments. First the government was supposed to cover their failures. Now they want the customer to do it too. And as taxpayers as well as customers, that's a double kick right square in the face as far as I am concerned, and it'll be a cold day in hell before I allow them to do it. It should be a cold day in hell for every American who has one of these little plastic monsters nibbling holes in the fabric of their financial security and dreams as well.

The secret is in creating real wealth and real money. It's in saving and using money we actually have. Cash, not credit, is freedom. It's power. If you don't have it, the monsters have got you.

DON'T MAKE A MONKEY OUT OF ME

You know, it strikes me as funny today as I underwent my physical for a new job, the things that they make you do. You know that I do factory work, right? It's over there on the right in my "about me" column. Well anyway, I do. Of course there are things in factory work that can be strenuous at times. You have to be at least reasonably agile and able to perform certain functions. You may have to lift things at times of varying weights and you may have to be able to get up onto platforms for example. Factory work is not necessarily wheelchair accessible if you know what I mean. I can understand a company's desire to make sure you can walk, stand, bend, and lift before they actually send you off onto their factory floor. This is at least minimally important to be ascertained.

But sometimes I think these so-called tests are something more akin to those what-would-you-do-for-a-Klondike-bar commercials. You know the ones I'm talking about. Like the one where the guy stands on a table and barks like a seal.

Don't get me wrong here. A job is important. It pays the bills. Generally speaking I still happen to need one. But they (the companies) seem to be begging the question how bad do you want it? with a bit of snicker and a grin.

In a word, and I'm being more than fair here, the tests are ridiculous. They are humiliating and ridiculous. Incredulously you stand there as they tell you, with every bit of seriousness, what ridiculous task you must perform and you suddenly have an urge to ask, "are you people serious? Lemme see that paperwork you have there. Are you sure this is for the factory job?"

Get on your hands and knees and crawl. Pick up this bolt and crawl backwards with it in your hand. Then crawl forward again and put the bolt back where you took it from. Reach up and play with this nut and bolt with your hand above your head for two minutes. Now play with the nut and bolt with your other hand for another two minutes. Walk up and down this staircase six times...

The ridiculous list of course goes on.

Look, I'm happy to have a job. The company I will be working for is a good one. But I'm not a show seal in a zoo waiting for you to throw me a fish when I perform well. Or a dog anxiously waiting for you to request my next trick so I can get a bone. Really, what it boils down to is I'm not an idiot. I'm simply a guy who wants to make an honest living so I can support myself, my wife, and my way of life.

We all know that the folks who come up with these ridiculous tests are of the type that would never be required to do any such thing, so I say to them knock it off. It isn't funny and nobody deserves to be made into a monkey for anything, especially for a job.

TAKING SIRIUS, SERIOUSLY

They say that necessity is the mother of all invention, but in the case of Sirius XM Radio, it's hard times that is the mother of its reinvention.

It's no secret that satellite radio heavily relied on auto sales to reel in new customers. That source has recently become drier than the Mojave Desert. But its not just the lack of auto sales that's gotten their bottom line all in a bunch. It's the shredded economy which is forcing cash-strapped consumers to keep their money firmly in their pockets. Shelling out dough for a shiny new car is difficult enough. Adding in discretionary items like subscription radio is equally difficult for a consumer to consider when his job is on the line and the kids need to be fed. But no one is tossing their iPod or their iPhone out with the bathwater, and those are absolutely just as discretionary as anything can be (though there are many who may politely argue that point), and that's gotten Sirius CEO Karmazin thinking. It's the access stupid.

Part of iPod's success, in my opinion, has been its user accessibility. If people were going to pay money to download music to enjoy, they were going to want to enjoy it at their leisure, and at the place of their choosing, just like they would be able to do with a regular CD. So iPods now can be played almost anywhere, thanks to compatible playing devices that you can plug the thing into. It's also given an enormous boost to record company sales, and its made it less popular to bootleg downloads via file share programs. To be sure, it's been a win, win situation.

And by the way, while we're on the topic, let me point out that Apple's stock is still a fantastic buy right now, and part of that is due to the ongoing reach and usability of the iPod and the expanding popularity of the iPhone.

And that makes Sirius XM attractive as well, as it looks to integrate and bundle its services with popular devices like the iPod and the iPhone. They may also provide its services through it's relationship with Direct TV, of whom Liberty Media has a controlling stake. Hooking up is just plain smart business thinking, in my opinion. I also think that this is just the tip of the iceberg.

I said a long time ago that I thought that satellite radio, in general, would eventually have to consider some form of advertising in order to generate revenue sufficient to carry them to profitability. Nowadays, I think that all Sirius XM needs to do is to present value to the consumer. Broadening the delivery system for their service is certainly going to offer much more in the way of value to the consumer than is currently the case. The more one can do with the service, the easier it is to access and enjoy the service, the more valuable that service becomes to the user. If Sirius XM can pull that off successfully, then I think the company can see its way to becoming profitable sooner rather than later.

Conversely, that profit is a long way ahead, and the company still may face some difficulty meeting debt obligations down the line. Liberty Media also needs to continue to be attracted to the company in order to stay on board. Certainly there is a considerable amount of risk in owning this company. That aside, I think Sirius may be well on their way to something, and for that reason, I think the company is a buy.

Full disclosure: Jim Bauer currently owns shares in both Apple, Inc., and Sirius XM Radio Holdings.

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN IS SUFFERING FROM A LACK OF APPRECIATION

Vice president Joe Biden told CNN today that he guaranteed that we are safer today than at any time during the eight years of the Bush Administration, rebuking a statement made by former vice president Dick Cheney in an interview with CNN's John King last month, whereas he told CNN that he felt that some of the choices being made by the Obama administration were putting Americans at greater risk of another terrorist attack.

The statement made by Biden is, of course, incredulous at best, if not a little bit unfair to the obvious successful accomplishment of the Bush administration to avoid future attacks. Bush never could be denied at least that one fact. We were not attacked following that terrible day in September 2001, and that was due largely to the policies of the Bush administration. To deny that is just plain ridiculous. And to Cheney's point, there's also no denying that much of Obama's plan with regard to Iraq, his failure to call terrorists for what they are, his interest in closing down Gitmo and releasing terrorists—potentially onto American soil—are all meant to appease the world. President Obama is pandering. In a way, pandering does indeed put us at a higher risk in that it tells all the bad people in the world we'd rather be touchy, feely than get down to the business of doing what we need to in order to protect our interests.

I'll admit that the United States has a bit of a reputation problem in many parts of the world, and that you can lay a lot of that blame on the Bush administration if you'd like to. That said, since when has it ever been about what the rest of the world thinks? The rest of the world didn't have planes flown into its buildings. The rest of the world wasn't attacked. The president had a choice to make and he made it. And even if you argue that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, certainly there was no denying the combatant stance that was being taken by the Iraqi government, the refusal to allow inspectors in to ensure compliance with U.N. resolutions, and ultimately prove the lack of weapons of mass destruction. There was no denying that Sadam Hussein was an evil dictator bent of killing his own citizens and bringing turmoil, chaos, and fear to his own citizens as well as Iraq's surrounding countries.

If we are safer as a nation today it has absolutely nothing at all to do with the policies of the Obama administration and everything to do with the policies of the former. It has everything to do with the bringing together of intelligence and law enforcement agencies to better communicate and share information and manpower. It has everything to do with the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, and with tightened security efforts at airports across the nation.

Biden should be thankful.