Business Continuity

1.      We started the workshop by viewing the video “Business Not As Usual: Preparing for Pandemic Flu” from Seattle-King county.  Use it internally to educate your workforce (and senior executives) on the value of being prepared. You can request a free copy (you must pay for shipping) from NACCHO.

2.      Most of the workforce absences are expected to be a result of school closures.

3.      You must have a pandemic management process (or infrastructure) in place to handle the event as it occurs because plans are a necessary thing, but they don’t often reflect the reality of the specific situation. Policies decided upon on Monday may not apply to the facts of Tuesday’s situation.

4.      Some firms are talking to public health officials about hosting vaccine programs in their work facilities, or at least trying to secure the vaccine for their critical workers, e.g. electricity generation operators. However, some are concerned about the legal liability issues if they haven’t engaged in this type of public health activity in the past.

5.      On the point of electricity generation operators – If these folks get the flu, and the generation facility is on the small side, they could shut it down because they don’t have enough staff to operate.  That shutdown means blackouts – or “rotating feeder outages”.  We could see more power outages as a result of H1N1 – a connection that most folks aren’t making, but for pandemic planning would be covered under the traditional BCM plan.

6.      Organizations are struggling with human resource policies regarding how to compensate workers if they do have the flu, especially if the worker has already used their allotted personal time off days or sick days. Some are offering extended time off options, but not everyone.

7.      Work-at-home solutions are at a high risk of failure if the work-at-home population in any given area reaches anywhere close to the 40% absentee rate. Internet bandwidth supply is not adequate to meet the demand. (Gartner is publishing a research note on this topic specifically.)

8.      Similar to the results of my June/2009 survey, many firms are not including IT vendors or IT service providers in their efforts. See my note: A Perilous Practice: Not Planning for IT and Data Center Operations Support During a Pandemic, G00169949. (You may have to be a Gartner client to view it.)

9.      Most firms expect to implement workforce travel restrictions once a pandemic strikes.

10. Most firms are trying to balance their protective mask usage policy between protecting the workforce and not offending customers. The firms who have direct and frequent contact with the public (for example retail operations) request that workers wear a mask when escorting a sick person out of the building only. Those firms that don’t have direct public contact public allow their workers to wear masks based upon their personal comfort level.

11. Those firms that have public congregation areas plan to close off those areas once a pandemic strikes. For example, bank branch lobbies will be closed and only the drive-up window will be open.

12. Firms with workers who must make home visits have equipped those workers with protective gear such as masks, sanitizer fluid for the hands and steering wheels of their cars/trucks, disposable gloves and so forth.

13. You can’t build your preparedness plans using workers’ personal information that has been gathered through the normal social networking in the work environment.

14. Some firms are concerned about law suits as a result of family members getting the flu from the firm’s employee.

15. You can’t expect to get resources from your local neighbors, partners and so forth because everyone will be in the same situation when the pandemic strikes.

16. Your plans and handling process must include actions that will assist you to return to normal operations once the pandemic is over.

17. You must include cultural differences in your plan activities. For example, blood transfusions may be refused if they are not from a person with the same national origin as the intended recipient.

Pandemic preparedness is a moving target-you need to keep adjusting your expectations and preparations as the situation changes around you

• June 13: researchers at the University of Wisconsin reported shifts in the H1N1 virus giving it a greater ability to infect the lungs than common seasonal flu viruses, increasing the risk of causing pneumonia.
• June 22: Cases resistant to Tamiflu were reported in Denmark, Hong Kong and Japan.
• June 24: the WHO reported that H1N1 vaccine yields are currently 25% to 50 % of the normal yields for seasonal influenza for some manufacturers. They also note a recent report suggests obesity may be another risk factor for severe disease.

You should quietly investigate a “worser case” scenario than the ones you have now using a more infectious, harsher, drug-resistant influenza strain.

• Make sure you factor in things like the suddenly-limited resources of both vaccines, local health departments and hospitals, which may make mass-inoculation programs problematic.
• Keep a closer eye on how the virus is changing-the list of “added risk factors” for severe sickness keeps growing as more is learned.
• Have you checked your supplier’s plans?  I have yet to speak with any clients who had factored in what the potentially high worker absentee rate would do to the supply chain for things like food and fuel… what happens to your plans if your healthy staff has hungry dependants and an empty fuel tank in their car?

The Harvard School of Public Health released the results of a survey they conducted in June/2009 regarding Americans’ views and concerns about the potential for a more severe outbreak of Influenza A (H1N1) in the fall or winter.

Gartner always advises businesses to review their pandemic preparedness planning from the perspective of 40% absenteeism – some of which is going to be workers staying home in order to care for children who are home due to school closures.  This particular point was considered in the June/2009  Harvard survey and the results are:

• 51% of US workers would be likely to stay home and miss work in order to care for children,
• 43% would be likely to lose pay or income and have money problems as a result, and
• 26% would be likely to lose their job or business as a result of staying home to care for children.

These survey results are something that businesses should take notice of and respond to in order to provide the workforce with as much information as possible regarding their approach to compensation and HR practices during a pandemic.   Not every business can afford to pay workers for time off during a pandemic – but providing the information to the workforce ahead of time means that they can plan for the event, and potentially have some of their fears allayed.

There are many areas where HR policies come under review for pandemic preparedness planning:

1. Paid time off;
2. Facility closures and quarantines;
3. Bereavement time;
4. Short-term and long-term disability;
5. Flexible work options; and
6. Sick workforce handling procedures.

There are no standard answers to these issues because HR laws are different by jurisdiction, and HR policies vary by organization and worker type (exempt and non-exempt).  Every organization must review its policies with internal and possibly external HR and compensation experts to find the right approach that is based on their business practices and their culture.

Finally, pay attention to privacy issues when developing sick workforce handling procedures.  Never disclose the name of a sick worker to the rest of the organization.  That said, most people in their work group already know who they are.  Therefore, regularly educate the workforce about their own need to maintain the privacy of their colleagues.

Rick DeLotto here… H1N1 reached World Health Organization Pandemic status 6 on June 11, 2009, meaning that it is firmly established worldwide. To date, this appears to be are relatively mild influenza strain in the developed world, with nearly 30,000 infections and 144 deaths officially reported in 74 countries. Unlike seasonal influenza outbreaks, which are most dangerous to the frail and elderly, the majority of H1N1 victims are under the age of 25 years. A small number of people infected (2%) develop severe illness and life-threatening pneumonia. Half to two thirds cases of severe and fatal infections have been in adults between the ages of 30 and 50 years, key contributors to the work force. Though many had preexisting conditions such as respiratory diseases, notably asthma, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, autoimmune disorders, and obesity, from a third to half, though of severe and fatal infections were in “previously healthy” young and middle aged people. Stress levels are likely to be, and remain high. This is a good time to quietly and cheerfully check the status of your pandemic preparations– and even less reason to panic than usual.

The media got such negative feedback about their “over coverage” of the Swine Flu, that it is hard to find a news report about its status anymore.  But news/media coverage does not mean that an issue is no longer of importance – in fact, it’s probably the time to really take note because the “sexiness” is gone and the hard work is underway.  For those organizations with operations in the southern hemisphere, your pandemic preparedness efforts should be cranking up about now because the winter season is just starting.  We could see some interesting twists and turns over the next few months.

I attended my local CT-InfraGard meeting last week where pandemic preparedness planning was discussed with both public and private sector participants. One of the findings from the discussion is that the WHO pandemic rating scheme doesn’t take into consideration the severity of the pandemic – only its geographic spread. Therefore, the WHO is considering revising its rating scheme to include severity levels. That is one of the reasons why the WHO has not raised the pandemic level from 5 to 6 – it hasn’t become severe enough to warrant a higher rating.

Our advice is that organizations should not wait for the WHO to finish this revision work. You should move ahead now to create a severity rating scheme and then map your pandemic preparedness actions into that new scheme.

One suggestion from Dr. Matthew Carter from the Connecticut Department of Health is to use the hurricane rating scheme – Category 1 through 5 – but using, for example, data points for medically treated, hospitalizations and/or deaths. For example, according to this approach, the Swine Flu event in 1918 would be a category 4 event. The Asian Flu event in 1956-57 is a category 3, and the Hong Kong flu event in 1966-67 is a category 2. The current Novel H1N1 flu would be a category 1 event – to date, there is not enough severity to rank any higher. A simple approach to use for each of your operating locations.

Don’t forget to confer with your own state’s department of health in developing your organization’s pandemic response plans. They are the front line in any type of public medical event.

NEDRIX (NorthEast Disaster Recovery Information X-Change) completed a survey of its membership on May 5, 2009 regarding their organization’s response to the potential pandemic due to the H1N1 virus.  100 members completed the survey and it is interesting to see how these organizations have responded to date.  The results published in the survey report are reassuring: most organizations are taking the potential pandemic seriously and are responding in a calm and controlled manner.  Implicit in the survey results, and based on individual comments from survey participants, are that these organizations are monitoring the situation for all operating locations worldwide.  This task is often assigned to the Pandemic Response Team or a Crisis Management team.

As expected at this phase of event, the top actions organizations are taking revolve around protecting staff from infection at the workplace – 95% are communicating to staff regarding H1N1 and the precautions to be taken to avoid infection, 81% made hand sanitizers available in all public areas, 46% stepped up cleaning activities in public areas and 91% encourage staff to stay home if they are sick (23% require a doctor’s note to return to work if they had flu symptoms).  Buying personal hygiene supplies such as masks, hand sanitizer, single-use thermometers, single-use visitor badges and the like are common steps at this point in implementing a pandemic response plan. 

There is a large difference in how organizations handle that sick time: 70% require the employee to use their own sick time versus 21% who do not.  Addressing policies such as sick time and requiring an employee to leave the workplace if sick and the resulting handling of the time away from work is an area that organizations need to work through with HR and Legal departments.  One organization commented that  they extended their sick time allowance to accommodate more time off due to a pandemic.

Travel restrictions are being implemented as well: 70% of survey participants require approval to travel from the US to other countries and 22% require approval to travel from other countries to the US.  Reactions from organizations at large are asking staff to curtail all non-essential travel for the time being.

Working from home is another area that the NEDRIX survey participants, and organizations at large, are instituting at higher rates - for essential staff as well as those staying home due to school closures.   Now is the time – before a pandemic strikes – to test work-at-home technical and business procedures set up as part of the pandemic response plan.  If you haven’t set up these procedures and solutions, it can be too late for your organization if a pandemic strikes soon.

One survey participant commented that they issued anti-viral medication to its workforce.  No attribution was given for that organization, but best-guess is that it is either a healthcare provider or government agency.

Finally, one survey participant commented that they have business operations in Mexico; therefore, their pandemic response plan implementation is further along due to Mexico being the foci of the event.

Read the entire survey report for more nuggets of information to enhance your organization’s pandemic response plan.

According to the World Health Organization, as of May 6^th, 22 countries have reported 1516 “laboratory confirmed” cases of H1N1 infections in people, 31 of whom have died. Meanwhile, the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention has reported that as of May 6, 2009 health authorities in 41 states have reported 642 cases of people ill from the H1N1 virus and two deaths.

We are extremely mindful and unreservedly respectful of the human misery and suffering that the H1N1 virus has brought to so many people in so many different parts of the world since April 24^th. It has been a very tragic two weeks. However, given the current extent of the H1N1 virus’ spread, we now believe current conditions are extremely suitable for clients to treat the current “Phase 5″ H1N1 situation as part of an unintended “pandemic stress test.” The results from analyzing this stress test can be used to significantly improve an organization’s state of readiness for the next medical crisis.

Below is a map showing the 22 countries reporting human cases of the H1N1 virus. We have also provided the latest list of the US states reporting cases of human H1N1 infections. We recommend that clients resist the temptation of becoming complacent about the H1N1 situation, especially in the wake of some reports indicating a slowing of the disease’s spread and its apparent mild virulence. Instead we suggest that clients use the two charts below to determine the specific state of readiness of a local authority’s ability to respond to the H1N1 outbreak in areas where one might have enterprise staff and operations.

New Influenza A (H1N1)

Clients are further advised to research local news sources within regions where they have customers, suppliers and enterprise operations to uncover any signs of readiness weaknesses as the H1N1 story was unfolding. While undergoing those news searches, clients should look for:

• News articles highlighting a lack of resources to cope with the current H1N1 influenza outbreak.
• Comments from local authorities indicating that responses would have been far worse had the virulence of the virus been far worse.
• Signs of overreactions and/or downright panic and to what extent insufficient local authority readiness led to such overreactions and/or panic.
• Changes in local highway traffic getting into and out of major geographic areas of business and commerce.
• Reactions by national authorities, especially restrictions in airline travel to and from areas deemed foci of the disease.

Regardless of whether the WHO ultimately declares a pandemic from the current H1N1 situation, the vagaries of viral mutations, contaminations and virulence have so far yielded an unintentional dress rehearsal for a potential time in the future of far greater destruction from a far stronger virus.

Today I arrived in Buenos Aires and am witnessing first hand the manner in which authorities in this country are responding to incoming visitors from one of the epicenters of the Influenza A (H1N1) virus outbreak: New York City. Stated simply, it’s not a pretty sight.

Passengers trying the disembark from our plane after a very long, eleven-hour flight were stopped by approximately one dozen Argentine health representatives, all of whom were wearing medical masks. We were informed that before people could leave the jet, they had to first declare on a paper form whether or not we were feeling ill. As a result, passengers quite unexpectedly had to find a spot where they could find pens (none provided) and flat surfaces to be able to fill out these forms. The jetway soon took on the appearance of scores of people in the post office at 9:00 PM on April 14th trying to complete and file their taxes before midnight.

Once one was able to finally leave the airport, the masks were gone, life seemed normal and the exquisite beauty of this city and country could finally be enjoyed.

There are many things that need to be developed and reviewed during the pandemic planning process, but the legal ramifications of pandemic response action steps is an area that many firms have not considered.

Some of the issues that need to be addressed include: the legality of asking employees for health status information, the liability concerns of administering medication, the impact on contract performance by absenteeism of your workforce as well as that of your supply chain, and compliance to existing laws and regulations regarding workforce and workplace management from federal/national, state and local governments.

Gartner Inc. does not advise clients on legal issues.  But, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP has published a client alert entitled Legal Concerns in a Swine Flu Emergency that should be reviewed by all pandemic planners.  Work with your legal department to get the answers for your enterprise.