As the price of gas increases, at least here in the United States, more and more employees are looking for opportunities to work from home. Telecommuting is a trend that has been growing steadily for some time now and seems unlikely to stop.

But sadly, there are plenty of operations that are trying to scam people instead of providing them with real work-from-home opportunities.

Some of these are discussed by John Rossheim over at Monster.comin an article called "Avoid Work-at-Home Job Scams."

The first thing to keep in mind is that you should probably explore any work-from –home opportunities within the company you are already working for. You may want to ask your manager, for example, if there are opportunities for that.

If that's not an option, you should explore telecommuting jobs within existing, legit companies instead of answering e-mails that show up in your inbox promising you great work-from-home chances.

For example, anything promising that if you stuff envelopes you will make a lot of money is probably a scam. It is a business model that makes little sense as most real companies could afford to have people in-house stuff envelopes. At the same time, any assemble-products-at-home jobs are likely not legit either.

You can check places like the Better Business Bureau and the Federal Trade Commission for information about companies offering you work-at-home opportunities to ensure their legitimate nature. It also pays to ask potential employers lots of questions before accepting any kind of position. If you do things right and carefully, you could end up saving lots of money on gas and renew your energy for your job.

It doesn't take a genius to know that 2008 has been a pretty up and down year with regard to the markets worldwide. To that end, I was quite surprised to happen upon an article that claims that American workers are continuing to fund their workplace savings plans, despite the volatility.

Many employers in the United States allow their employees to fund retirement plans, often with corporate matching or some level of participation. There are a number of advantages to these plans, including tax deductions (contributions are taken pre-tax and decrease tax liability) and faster savings when your company participates.

The downside is that this money is locked up and it's not easy (nor is it suggested) to make regular modifications to your investments. To that end, when things are good, they are good. When times go sour, well, let's just say that I look at my account balance once ever month so as not to be depressed.

Despite being the nation responsible for the subprime mess and that racks up amazing numbers in credit card debt, it's good to see that people are still thinking of their retirement and not being reactionary to the instability of the moment. Keeping a cool head and continuing to save for the future may be one of the smartest things one can do with their money at the moment.

In my case, I've decided to continue a conservative-to-moderate portfolio and ride it out.

It's becoming painfully obvious that CEOs and CFOs around the world are not reading our blog as often, or carefully, as they should. If they did, they'd notice that I've noted on several occasions the true cost of workplace stress on several industrialized nations.

The latest in my missive is Australia, where workplace stress and general un-wellness is costing the Australia economy $14.81 billion (Australian).

According to research recently published in the Herald Sun, the average Australian work misses over 3 days of work solely due to stress. And this isn't taking into account other illnesses, or holiday; this is purely burnout from work overload.

According to the Medibank report, the actual amount of monies lost due to stress is at $5.12 billion per year. However, adding the cost of those who decide to weather the storm and come to work, only to be useless, brings us to the number of $14.81 billion.

Australia is likely no different than work in Asia, the Americas, or Europe (the three areas that we tend to discus most often here) in that employees are expected to take a lot from their employers. Often, the return on an employee's investment isn't that great (unless you're one of those types who think that an employee is just spending a company owner's cash and should count his or her blessings just to have a job).

As I've said before, and I'll say it again, companies need to find a way to deal with stressed employees in a more efficient manner. Obviously, there will always be some stress in the workplace, which can be a motivating factor as well.

However, working someone to the point that their health is in jeopardy, or to look at it from another angle, to the point that they cannot make you any money, it's simply unacceptable in the 21st century.

If companies aren't going to look at it from a human health standpoint, perhaps they should see how much of that $14.81 billion represents their company's share and then act accordingly.

The United States released census data last week with headline-grabbing results that are sure to freak out white Americans. Because by 2050, minorities will be the majority in the United States.

Of course, this has some pretty big implications too for the workplace. And buried in the stats is another interesting figure. The percentage of the population that is able to work in 2050 is expected to drop to 57%.

When I think of how little diversity I see in the workforce, I am grateful that I won't be working in 2050. In 2008, it seems that we have difficulties dealing with race and equality in the workplace, how will things be in 2008?

For that reason, it seems that perhaps a little more flexibility and sensitivity are in order. While many people are thinking that these statistics refer solely to African-Americans and Hispanics, these aren't the only minorities in the U.S.

2050 is still a long ways off; it seems that each generation is slightly more tolerant than the previous one. Fortunately, that leaves us some time to get our act together and learn to work together as a people, instead of continually applying labels and stereotypes.

There are days when I think that I should become a journalist. Even though I am sure that I take more than a few liberties here stating the obvious, they get much better paid for doing so!

Take, for example, this recent article, Experts say workplace, politics don't mix.

You don't say! Having worked in several countries, I've seen the proo, although I can only wonder how appropriate this statement is in the East or Middle East. One recent survey by Vault.com reveals that 35% of managers open share their political views in the workplace, while a whopping 66% of employees do the same. I'm quite certain that such statistics would make any HR manager spit up their coffee.

Anecdotally speaking, it seems to me that those who love spreading their views the most are those who are on the fringes. It's either the "all foreigners out" group or those who would have you bathe in cow dung to protect the environment – neither of which group appeal to me.

Here's a friendly reminder: the workplace is a place for you to make a living, earn a check, etc. It's not a public forum for people to wax poetically or to spread their own political agenda while at the water cooler.

I can almost see the HR folks nodding their heads in agreement, which must mean I'm on to something here.

It can be a tall order trying to keep your employees interested and engaged in their work. According to the business consulting organization SCORE, there are 10 things you can do that will help. Keeping these things in mind can help you manage better and keep your office productive.

1. Throw out any pre-conceived notions you may have about employees in general.
2. Try to approach your people with fresh eyes and take into account their unique perspective.
3. Make sure all of your people are equipped with what they need to do their job.
4. When you manage your employees make sure they understand exactly what is expected of them in their respective jobs.
5. Take time to get to know your employees and what their career goals are.
6. Pay the money needed and take the time to make sure your workers are properly trained.
7. Ask your direct-reports to evaluate you. Find out how they perceive you and your work and adjust accordingly.
8. Pay attention to the office rituals and what's going on around you.
9. Recognize and reward employees who have done their job well and do a good job of this so others will want to do the same.
10. Be consistent. Don't start programs and then drop them after a few weeks. So stick with it.

    Whatever you do, taking the old adage of the manager who hides in his office is exactly the wrong way to go. Talk to your people, get to know them, and treat them like human beings and you'll get a response in return.

Are people at the heart of your organisation? Do you think you're a good employer? If you're sure that you are and you're based in the UK, then why not enter Best Companies Accreditation or The Sunday Times Best Companies to Work For Competition.

The Best Companies Accreditation is widely regarded as a leading benchmark of workplace engagement and the prestigious Sunday Times Best Companies to Work For Competition is now an Institution in its own right.

Organisations interested in taking part can register immediately by visiting www.bestcompanies.co.uk or call Best Companies on 01978 856 222. Registration closes on October 31st 2008.

Announcements of Accreditation successes will be made in January 2009 and The Sunday Times Best Companies to Work For competition winners will be announced next March.

Strewth mate! According to a news story that I read last weekend, foul-mouthed bosses in Australia are now persona non grata.

While it's nice to see that abusive language won't be tolerated from superiors to their subordinates, I've had more than one manager in my career whose colorful use of the English language was more humorous than anything else.

Australia's Workplace Ombudsman recently ruled in a case involving a woman employee who was on the receiving end of a foul-mouthed tirade during the Workplace Agreement dealings last year. Bosses were put on notice that such behavior wouldn't be tolerated, especially when dealing with HR-related issues.

I was surprised to see that previously, such language wouldn't have been considered as harassment or abusive language. It's likely that there still are a few bosses out there that tend to overstep the line when speaking with their employees. Fortunately, in this case, the Ombudsman made the right call and put such bosses on a short leash.

In cases such as this, it might be more worthwhile to try and find a company that is more suited to one's tastes - or at least doesn't abuse employees.

Whether bosses believe it or not, every employee deserves respect. Since this employee in question wasn't getting it, perhaps she should have dropped a few F-bombs of her own in kind.

A large American company recently took a very controversial position, which is likely to cause quite a stir as it is more widely reported. Tyson Foods has decided to repeal its Labor Day holiday and institute a Muslim holiday in its place.

The company's workers union, which has hundreds of Muslim members, has decided to make this a "priority".

Of course, Tyson is perfectly within its rights to implement such a decision; as the aforementioned article points out, it hasn't had to take extra measures for its accommodation.

But why should somebody's religion have an effect on their work? One can argue that Christmas is a Christian holiday, however many non-Christians (indeed, non-religious) people in the United States celebrate it. Indeed, it's more of a cultural event than a religious one in many, many households.

Such a decision opens a larger can of worms – do companies need to make arrangements for Pagan employees? What about for Jewish employees? Atheist employees who want no religious holidays?

While the union had its heart in the right place, I find it difficult to make accommodations for one minority and then neglect other minorities or religions in the workplace.

Don't expect the criticisms to die down soon; still, this is of Tyson's own making.

Got a pretty unpleasant surprise in the mail the other day; this is one that I'm sure that many people in the US receive on a daily basis. Let me explain.

We recently took two family members to the doctor's office in a major urban area of the United States for some routine vaccinations. We plopped down our insurance card, confident in its abilities as one of the largest providers in the country.

Unfortunately, we greatly overestimated its capabilities, because I about had a heart attack when I received two bills totaling $1000 for services.

It wasn't so much the $130 fee per each of my family members' visit (yes, this was basically the "walk through the door" fee), nor was it the fact that each vaccination had a $17 administration fee (save for the combined vaccination that had a $32 fee).

No, what really got me was the reason in a separate letter from our former insurance provider telling us that vaccinations, checkups, preventive medicine and wellness are not covered under our plan – only sickness or emergencies are.

So, which is worse? That the employer, a major non-profit organization dedicated to helping the poor throughout the world, that won't even vaccinate the children of its own employees, or the fact that we have an insurance provider (through a job) that won't pay for a hepatitis vaccination, but would rather wait until he has the illness and pay hundreds times more money on the treatment. You decide.

Just about every company has some kind of dress code. But while many of these might seem pretty relaxed, it might just be that your boss notices how you dress and bases his or her decision on promoting you on that very thing.

So argues this piece on CNN.com, adding that there is a seemingly endless battle at companies with dress codes:

Battle No. 1: Employees misinterpret the dress code or they don't abide by it. Battle No. 2: Companies have a code in place but don't enforce it. Battle No. 3: Companies don't have a dress code but they still reprimand employees for wearing certain attire. Or, Battle No. 4: There's constant objection from certain industries along the lines of, 'Why do I have to look nice at work if I don't see anybody?'

Of course, the article also mentions that how you dress may be more important depending on what industry you work in. For example, the financial industries industry is one that requires a more formal way of dressing.

In summer months, when the clothing seems to become less and the dress codes become less enforced, don't use that as an excuse not to dress professionally.

Take the time to adhere to your dress code, in short. Dress for success and your managers will notice. If you look the part, they may perceive you in the part of management yourself and that could help you move up the ladder more quickly than you realize.

Before you say "yes" to a new job offer, have a read of this piece by Rachel Zupek, on Careerbuildr.com. It could save you no end of problems down the road.

Technically speaking, the article is meant for those considering their first job in the "real" world. However, the tips certainly apply to anyone considering a change in their career. For example:

• Consider realistic expectations for your salary. If you have decided to change careers entirely, you may end up making less than you were previously. Don't assume that you will be making millions immediately.
• Carefully weigh the benefits package offered. Remember that your salary is just one component of an overall package. What other benefits are offered? Are they better than at your current job.
• Remember that job satisfaction is more important than how much you make. This is something far too many people who have been in the working world forget. No matter how much money you make, if you hate your job, you're going to be miserable.
• Make a decision based on "real life" scenarios and not "what-ifs." Don't worry about what might happen if you happen to succeed at your new job. What will you be doing now? What is truly realistic at the new job considering your future?
• Remember that finding a job is a job all by itself. If you are looking to make a change, you need to approach it just like you would a project at work. Plan things ahead of time and devote time working at it.

There are more tips and suggestions within the article. While all of them also apply to those who are only starting out in the working world, if you've decided you need to make a change in your current career-path you may want to think about them as well.

Smoking in the workplace has been all over the news in recent months, especially since many cities across Europe and North America have outright banned it.

However, there is another problem with respect to the implementation of this law that bothers health advocates and law-makers – companies' general lack of interest or perceived value in getting workers to stop smoking.

In short, don't smoke here, do what you like afterwards. A recent article in MarketWatch shows how bad the apathy is.

To some degree, I can understand an employer's reticence to do anything beyond outlawing smoking on the premises. After all, one's private life is just that.

However, the spirit of the law may implore employers to go beyond their duty. Surely it's still in their interest to have their employees in the best health possible? Even from a practical point of view (read: money), getting employees to stop smoking can reduce insurance premiums.

In light of those business reasons for getting employees to kick a bad habit, perhaps more companies will partake in programs geared towards helping employees get cigarettes out of their lives.

Why do governments continue to push the lie that they care about those they are supposed to represent? The American Department of Labor decided to be a sly guy and try to push through new legislation at the last minute that would make it harder to protect workers exposure to chemicals while at work.

Don't believe me? Read for yourself.

See, what's dodgy here is that the Labor Department doesn't feel like they need to discuss it or owe its citizens an explanation. Taking a closer look at the article, the new rules would make it easier for companies to challenge any litigation brought by staff over chemical exposure.

It also means that future generations of workers would likely have more exposure to chemicals than previous generations of workers. More is a good thing, right?

The Labor Department insists that more will be made available once the proposal becomes public. But in Washington, that means it will be made public with little fanfare and released on a Friday afternoon around 4pm

It's hard to believe that our elected officials would toy with the idea of even potentially making our workplaces less safe than in previous generations. It seems to me that past generations should be the bare minimum level of acceptance.

However, as they say in Washington, "follow the money", so pay close attention to how this plays out and who seeks to benefit. It certainly isn't the guy sniffing toxins from 8am to 6pm.

A job interview can be an intimidating experience from beginning to end. While most of the questions you're likely to be asked are relatively straightforward, one that seems deceptively simple can be the hardest to answer. That question is "Why should I hire you?".

How you ought to approach this question is discussed in this article by Joe Turner on Careerbuilder.com.

According to Turner, this question often leads to comedic answers or answers that the interviewee thinks is clever. Nothing could be worse than trying to respond in either of those methods. The person doing the interview is taking this very seriously and if you don't, they will immediately dismiss you.

Turner suggests that there are only five things that the interviewer is interested in when asking this question:

1. Your skills
2. Your knowledge about the company
3. Your manageability
4. Your affordability
5. Whether you can go above and beyond your job description.

Use this question to brag about yourself and don't be shy about it. If you worked long hours and set yourself apart at your previous job, now is the time to mention that. Don't suddenly be modest. You need to set yourself apart from the other candidates and this is the questions where you can really do that.

By keeping that in mind, and understanding the points they are interested in, you can achieve success in that interview. Therefore, that dream job you're applying for need not be as far out of reach as you think it might be.