ILNews

More companies planning holiday parties, survey says

Scott Olson
November 30, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

More companies seem to be in the holiday spirit this year.

Survey results released this week by Chicago-based employment consultancy Challenger Gray & Christmas Inc. show 83 percent of companies polled plan holiday parties this December.

That’s up from 68 percent last year, when firms were less confident about the economy, said Rick Cobb, Challenger’s executive vice president, and not far from the 90 percent which held them in pre-recession 2007.

For many companies, 2012 may feel like the first time in a while there is reason to celebrate, Cobb said.

Indeed, 10.3 percent of those surveyed said their company plans to host a holiday party after skipping festivities for at least a year.

“With hiring still relatively weak, employers are basically asking existing workers to do more with less,” Cobb said in a prepared statement. “Strong profits and rising productivity numbers suggest that workers are in fact delivering on that request. What better way to reward this hard work than with a holiday party.”

More than 80 percent of those that plan to host a party say they’ll spend the same amount as last year, while 17 percent say they’ll shell out more.

But holiday parties don’t have to be extravagant to be meaningful to employees, said Cobb, noting that a small company on a tight budget can easily host a potluck lunch in which employees provide most of the food.

Still, 63 percent said they plan to use a caterer or event planner, significantly up from 45 percent last year.

More companies, however, are celebrating on company premises. This year, 55 percent said they will stay on site, a sizable jump from the 30 percent which said they would last year.

What often generates the most debate is whether to serve alcohol. Nearly half of the companies surveyed, about the same as last year, said they plan to provide it.

And with that comes the yearly warning to employees to avoid embarrassing themselves.

“However, employees should not simply stand in the corner in an effort to stay off the radar,” Cobb said. “Make an effort to break away from your comfort zone and introduce yourself to those who might help your career.”

About 100 companies participated in the survey, Challenger said.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

  2. Seventh Circuit Court Judge Diane Wood has stated in “The Rule of Law in Times of Stress” (2003), “that neither laws nor the procedures used to create or implement them should be secret; and . . . the laws must not be arbitrary.” According to the American Bar Association, Wood’s quote drives home this point: The rule of law also requires that people can expect predictable results from the legal system; this is what Judge Wood implies when she says that “the laws must not be arbitrary.” Predictable results mean that people who act in the same way can expect the law to treat them in the same way. If similar actions do not produce similar legal outcomes, people cannot use the law to guide their actions, and a “rule of law” does not exist.

  3. Linda, I sure hope you are not seeking a law license, for such eighteenth century sentiments could result in your denial in some jurisdictions minting attorneys for our tolerant and inclusive profession.

  4. Mazel Tov to the newlyweds. And to those bakers, photographers, printers, clerks, judges and others who will lose careers and social standing for not saluting the New World (Dis)Order, we can all direct our Two Minutes of Hate as Big Brother asks of us. Progress! Onward!

  5. My daughter was taken from my home at the end of June/2014. I said I would sign the safety plan but my husband would not. My husband said he would leave the house so my daughter could stay with me but the case worker said no her mind is made up she is taking my daughter. My daughter went to a friends and then the friend filed a restraining order which she was told by dcs if she did not then they would take my daughter away from her. The restraining order was not in effect until we were to go to court. Eventually it was dropped but for 2 months DCS refused to allow me to have any contact and was using the restraining order as the reason but it was not in effect. This was Dcs violating my rights. Please help me I don't have the money for an attorney. Can anyone take this case Pro Bono?

ADVERTISEMENT