Do you have toxic co-workers in the office? I'm not talking about the types who need to wear more deodorant during the summer months (though we probably could include those in these groups); I'm talking about the type of guy you love to hate. As this article puts it, the type of guy whose departures is considered a holiday by everybody else in the company.

Of course, I naively went looking for information on how to handle such co-workers, but rather it just warned me that they're out there and what damage they can do. Like many of you, I've been in the working world simply far too long to not know what such characters are capable of doing to an office and its collective mood.

Then I started to wonder that, statistically speaking, there must be toxic professionals reading that very article, yet they don't know even recognize their own abhorrence. That in turn led me to think back at every job I've held – have I ever been the toxic colleague?

I still maintain that I'm not a guilty party, but since I dislike people who can't recognize their own shortcomings, I do apologize now to each and every former and current colleague for any instance where I may have been a toxic co-worker. For what it's worth, if I am guilty, I hope you all received a paid day off on the anniversary of my departure.

I'm sure that you've picked up the newspaper or turned on the evening news, only to ask yourself, "what on earth were they thinking?" or even "why weren't they thinking?" Folks, I endured such a moment this afternoon when I read the following article, "Salary 'gag orders' are workplace no-no's".

For starters, we're going to just pretend that the erroneously-used apostrophe doesn't exist in the last word of the title.

OK, pedantry aside, it turns out that a number of companies in Colorado decided that one way to keep down the hysteria (or conversations at the water cooler) surrounding the current economic conditions is to go ahead and put some silly new law into place to show the workers who exactly is boss. What's comical is when such activities contradict current labor laws, making them unenforceable.

What are these silly new bans? In this case, we're talking about companies preventing employees from discussing their salaries in the workplace.

Want me to say that again? Are they worried that the office cleaners might finally figure out that the VP of Marketing is making ten times more than they are? Is the fresh-out-of-college kid going to go ballistic when he finds out that his colleague, who has 10 years senior his experience, is making $20,000 more than he is?

Not only is this ridiculous, but it also is illegal in Colorado, where any sort of discipline with regards to discussion or comparisons of benefits or wages is illegal. While I can appreciate Colorado companies wanting to take control of a bad situation and try to make morale better, let's not forget that the road to hell is paved with good intentions - this law just doesn't seem like one of those cases.

In all my working life, I can think of three people that I've know who died – all unexpectedly. So. I'm pleased to see that organizations like the American Cancer Society and some large businesses are trying to deal with the specific effects of cancer in the workplace.

While we may not be best friends or spend our weekends hanging out together, it's fair to say that we enjoy a certain camaraderie for the people with whom we work. The unexpected loss or prolonged illness of someone that we've grown accustomed to talking with and knowing definitely has an impact on how we approach our work.

So I'm hoping that the conference that the ACS is sponsoring is going to deal with the emotional aspects of illness and not simply how to deal with productivity issues.

While it's true that a team may suffer a loss of morale or productivity when dealing with the loss or illness of a teammate, such affects are temporary. I'm not sure that those net results should be the primary factor driving conferences. Unfortunately, the article in question mentions only how much cancer costs companies in terms of lost productivity and care expenses (insurance premiums, I bet): $219 billion dollars.

When you look at the who's who list (United Airlines, AT&T, etc.), you have to believe this is going to more about motivating you to keep your chin and profits up than it is about a Tuesday with Morrie.

I've been following the healthcare reform debate in the United States from afar with great interest. Of all the arguments for and against, one voice has been particularly silent: that of management, such as CEOs, HR, CFOs, etc. Where does business, especially big business stand on this topic? The deafening silence makes it hard to figure out.

If you take a look at your most recent pay stub, you're likely to notice a line that notes how much was withheld for your health insurance premium. Of course, many companies that offer healthcare coverage also pick up a substantial portion of the cost – at the companies' expense.

But depending on the plan negotiated by the company, the premium for family coverage can be very expensive – as in several thousands of dollars per month. Multiply that amount by the number of employees who have families and want coverage; we're talking some serious amount of cash that a company must fork out each month.

Of course, there's a reason that companies aren't complaining about this and jumping up and down, stark raving mad. I'm sure there's some sort of tax write off (as an operating expense) to help them lower their tax burden. However, wouldn't it be nice to have the healthcare system taken out of the hands of employers? Wouldn't it be nice for companies to be back in the business of running their business and putting administration back in the governments' responsibility?

Like with everything else in life, you simply need to follow the money. Companies aren't yet involved in this battle because they don't think it's in their interest. Well, even if that's true, a CEO or a CFO is still an employee and needs to get in the fight that gets healthcare access for everyone – they might even save themselves a little bit of cash.

Although they are generally discouraged, the fact is that people do fall in love and enter relationships with co-workers. After all, when you spend eight hours a day with people and have little time for outside relationships, the connections get made at work.

So if you do find youself in a workplace relationship, how should you behave? This article by the aptly-named "Love Guru" has some suggestions.

First, it's best to avoid workplace romances from the get-go. They can lead to complications and if one member in the relationship is suddenly promoted, it can really cause problems.

Second, if you do find yourself in a romance you should limit your workday contact. Nothing can kill a relationship faster than spending twenty-four hours a day with each other. Also, limit what you say about your co-worker and your relationships to others in the office.

Third, do not show up and then leave the office at the same time as the person you are in a relationship with. This is especially true if you are trying to keep the relationship a secret.

Fourth, make good use of company activities such as parties and picnics. This is a good time to spend with the one you love without raising eyebrows. Just try not to be overly affectionate in front of everyone else.

The "Love Guru" has numerous tips to get you through it. The tips are particularly relevant for those at companies with rules against such relationships, thus necessitating keeping it secret. So, if you are determined to enter into such a relationship, learn what you need to in order to keep it quiet.

From Southern California, the San Gabriel Valley Tribune tells us that job security is taking a hit. Pardon my coarse language, but it looks like a letter is missing in that last word. As bad as my vulgar reference was, it's nowhere near as bad as some of the quotes in this article. In fact, if you haven't called your boss to thank him today for having a job, you had better get on it.

At first, I was expecting to read another article on how, guess what, the economy is bad and people are feeling the pinch of losing their jobs or are afraid that they will lose them. Yeah, the article is a bit of both to be honest!

Unfortunately, it's much worse. It interviews a recruiter who refers to people who still have jobs as being either brown-nosers or depressed. How morose. Another slightly-less alpha-male confrere argues that the brown-nosers aren't really kissing up to keep their job, they're simply being smart. Right...

What really takes the cake for me is that the article insists that the fear of losing one's job is keeping the rank and file in order – they're working longer, harder, more efficiently (I'd swear this was a reprint out of the WSJ commentary pages).

Oh, and working like oxen, sweating from the 8th circle of Dante's Inferno is apparently not only good for the company (no kidding), but for the employee, too! That really made me spew my coffee.

I think the last comment speaks for itself, so I'll just allow you to marinate on that. Don't believe me? Read the article for yourself!

Despite having spent over 25 years living in the United States, sometimes I just can't figure out the way my countrymen see things. Here's a case in point: city workers in NW Pennsylvania are getting their health insurance premiums paid by their employer. And apparently that's a bad thing.

The article takes issue with this practice largely in light of difficult financial times. While I can see the point of their argument, I'd posit that such benefits aren't as rare as the article makes them out to be. While it's increasingly less likely that your employer will cover 100% of your health insurance costs, it does happen.

If an employer is unable or unwilling to pay out for cover, perhaps we should start asking why. As in why is it increasingly hard for companies to provide basic health care to their employees?

I'm well aware (from my ivory towers on the other side of the Atlantic) that the US is about to embark on a national dialog concerning health care. While I hear pundits worrying about what will happen to the health insurance companies, I bet that isn't quite the concern of millions of Americans who depend on their jobs not just for a wage, but also for any sort of health care coverage.

There's nothing wrong with asking hard questions – and that goes for small to mid-sized business owners, who should start pushing back. In a land where health care access is tied to your ability to stay employed in troubles times, from afar, things are looking more and more like the TV show Survivor.

If you base your judgment on what written across the web, most of the working world is miserable most of the time. Considering that we spend more of our lives at work than anywhere else, that means a lot of very unhappy people around the world.

So can you make yourself happy at your job? This article on About.com suggests that you can.

According to the article, the first thing you need to do is choose to be happy at work. This sounds like a ridiculous thing to say, but it's true. You can decide your mood first thing in the morning. If you determine to be happy, odds are likely you will be happy.

The second tip suggested is to find something you love to do and do one of those things every day. It may not be your job, but if you take time for yourself and do something you love, it can make your entire day brighter.

Third, remember that you can choose your own destiny and the path your career takes. Take classes if you have to, but learn something new and do something that will get you where you want to be.

Much of the tips suggested involve taking charge of your own life and your own career. Rather than letting others tell you what to do and how to behave, take charge of things yourself. By doing that, you put the power back in your hands and can move your life in a direction that will make you happier.

A story comes out of Texas about a woman who was ordered to take down her American flag at work. There are a number of things that bother me here. The first, of course, was the fact that Texas wanted to secede from the US a few weeks ago, now they want the "freedom" to display the American flag? Jeez, make up your minds already . . .

The flag means different things to different people, which isn't surprising. As such, a difference in interpretation could lead to tensions in the workplace. As a manager, one important function is to maintain a professional atmosphere or mutual respect in order to keep productivity and morale.

I find the colleague who was offended by the presence of the flag (especially since the article mentions that they aren't even from the US) a bit rich. I couldn't see myself complaining at work because someone displayed a French flag. As a guest in their country, I'd likely keep any reservations to myself.

At the end of the day, the employee was allowed to display her flag, to her obvious happiness. I just wonder if she feels like she's made some sort of statement; most of us just want to hang pictures of our families or pets, not a nylon flag. Perhaps this little lesson will encourage her employer to clearly define rules about what can or cannot be displayed on workplace property.

Depending on where you sit, the word union is either a galvanizing force or just another corrupt part of the corporate system. I came across an interesting article on what role unions should have (if any) in the workplace – and it's one whose anti-union line I certainly don't agree with.

First, I have to believe that the union is designed to benefit the employees. When I read reader comments on other web sites with regards to unions, you'd think that they are heretics or communists seeking to kill kittens. In certain industries, it seems impossible to me for employees to stand up to management in order to get advancements, such as benefits, better pay or conditions. The auto industry is a prime example.

The author of this article proposes optional union membership. Very well. What happens then when the union negotiates contracts that benefits union members. Are the non-union guys who opted out seriously thinking that they'll get a piece of the pie too by "demanding" the same contract?

The union isn't perfect, but it seems to be the most viable way of moving things forward or improving the lives of workers. Maybe that isn't always the end result, but it's better than trying to go it alone.

Once again it's time to discuss a survey that needn't ever take place, because the results were so obvious. CareerBuilder takes a look at study that shows how to be a career wrecker: the effects of layoffs on those left behind.

While the result was to be expected, I can hope that perhaps it causes some discussion on the topic of companies' expectations post-layoffs.

Here are some numbers: According to the survey, just under half of respondents (47%) have had their workload increase after layoffs. Moving on, 37% (it's not clear if it's 37% of respondents or of the 47%) feel that they do the work of two people. Guess what? 30% are burned out. Hardly surprising!

Of course, the 47% are expected to not only do more, but to like it and to just be grateful you have a job. For whatever reason, complaining about working conditions in the US is considered a sign of laziness or weakness, so people tend to buck up and take it. I wonder how many of the 30% seek a solution to their problem; my guess is far less than 30%.

What intrigues me most about the aforementioned article is the attitude of the HR vice-president at CareerBuilder. Instead of pencil pushers like her taking a pay cut or a layoff, she suggests working with your manager to see how you can get all the work done.

Personally, I'd like to see a way to get more butts in seats if there is clearly work to be done instead of trying to nickel and dime the rank and file into doing more for less.

Ever wish you could take a shower while at work? Ever wish that others could take a shower while at work? Believe it or not, there's actually a small movement for this luxury, according to a recent article. To be honest, on a day like today (it's HOT!), it would be more than welcome.

There is a belief held by some that we do our best thinking while lathered up under the shower faucet. While I can see that point of view, I'd say that I'd do my best thinking while lying on a hammock in my backyard. I suspect that my employer would not take to that view as readily I would.

First, one has to wonder how many facilities actually have the room and inclination to pull such a feet off, after all, most of us don't work in a gym. When would people take a shower? During their lunch or smoke break?

Currently, my office has shower facilities that are not used frequently. In fact, only colleagues who go to the gym or go running ever use the showers.

To me, this sounds like a slightly over the top idea that wouldn't realistically improve productivity or office morale. It would just raise the company's water bill.

We all know from the literally hundreds of websites and blogs out there about the world of work that a large proportion of us hate our employers. Maybe this is something that has been going on as long as there have been bosses and the people who work for them.

But what is it we're so upset about? Why are we so angry? An article at TheSpec.com takes a look at this and tries to analyze it.

The article interviews Bruce Katcher who wrote the book "30 Reasons Employees Hate their Managers: What Your People May Be Thinking and What You Can Do About It." Katcher runs a consulting firm which specializes in job satisfaction surveys. He claims that he has received over 50,000 employee complaints.

The reasons we hate work so much are pretty predictable – which makes it all the more sad that they're still such a problem for so many people.

According to Katcher , "research has found that 46 per cent of employees believe management treats them with disrespect, 63 per cent say that decisions in their company are usually not made at the appropriate level, 52 per cent do not feel free to voice their opinions openly, 43 per cent say their good work goes unrecognized and 53 per cent say their boss doesn't personally motivate them."

Katcher also breaks down reasons why being a good boss is so difficult. Essentially, he argues, most of those in management have not been properly trained to manage and deal with people. Also, since so many employees hate their job and their bosses, they don't have any good role models or mentors to make them any better once they get there.

So, if you feel like your boss mistreats you, you are not alone. In fact, there may be some scientific proof that you are correct in your feelings.

Fear can make people do funny things, especially if their livelihood is on the line. But, let's be honest, as the economy has slowed down to a crawl, is this fear really rational? Are we all at risk of losing our jobs? This fear of unemployment and its effects on us – while we're still employed – is explored in this interesting article.

Think about times when you've been afraid in the past. Did your behavior change? Did you start fumbling through actions? Chances are that you may be feeling a bit under the gun at the office due to this turbulent economy and increasing amounts of bad news.

Such worries are likely to have some unintended consequences, such as careless mistakes in work (due to lack of concentration), or less productivity (due to more time overanalyzing and second guessing others' work. This is especially difficult for those working as consultants who have to please their hiring boss as well as their client.

While a healthy dose of fear and concern are both logical and appropriate, letting such feelings get out of hand to the point that we jeopardize our work by the low level of its quality isn't going to do you any favors. In fact, it's likely to get you pushed out even faster. In times of professional uncertainty, keeping your head down and nose to the grindstone may just be what you need to make it through to the light at the end of the tunnel.

Americans are a resilient bunch. You can show them that the sky is falling in, but they still won't bother to take out an umbrella to cover themselves. You can tell them that their workplace savings scheme (401k) is sinking like the Titanic, but they'll still throw money at it.

Despite the levels of unemployment, pay cuts, etc, Americans are continuing to heavily invest in these retirement accounts. To be fair, the average pre-tax amount put aside is roughly $100 less than it was a year ago (pre-everything hitting the proverbial fan).

While it's great to see my fellow countrymen save for a rainy day, I have to wonder if 401k is really the vehicle to do this. Unfortunately, your workplace isn't the place to get fully-informed information about the various savings plans, and the folks holding your savings plan won't likely give you information with full-disclosure.

Given recent banking and investment problems, your best bet may well be under your mattress!