Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to Kelly Services’ second-quarter earnings conference call. All parties will be on listen only until the question-and-answer portion of the presentation. Today’s call is being recorded at the request of Kelly Services. If anyone has any objections you may disconnect at this time. I would now like to turn the meeting over to your host, Mr. Carl Camden, President and CEO. Sir, you may begin.

Thank you, John, and good morning, everyone. Welcome to Kelly Services’ 2015 Q2 conference call. And with me on today’s call is Olivier Thirot, our acting CFO. Let me remind you that any comments made during this call, including the Q&A, may include forward-looking statements about our expectations for future performance. Actual results could differ materially from those suggested by our comments and we have no obligation to update the statements made on this call. Please refer to our SEC filings for a description of the risk factors that could influence the Company’s actual future performance. As we walk through our quarterly results this morning, let me point out that our year-over-year comparisons are represented in constant currency due to ongoing volatility in foreign currency exchange rates. Now turning to Kelly’s second-quarter results, I am pleased to report we once again delivered solid performance and good operating leverage. Revenue for the quarter was $1.4 billion, up 3.9% year over year. Our gross profit rate for the second quarter was 16.1%, a decline of 10 basis points compared to Q2 last year. All told, we achieved an operating profit of roughly $12 million for the quarter, a 50% improvement over last year’s Q2 operating profit in nominal currency, excluding our 2014 restructuring and a 73% year-over-year improvement in constant currency. Kelly’s second-quarter earnings from continuing operations in nominal currency were $0.18 per share compared to earnings of $0.10 per share for the same period last year, again excluding the 2014 restructuring charge. Our Q2 earnings were negatively impacted by $0.04 per share due to currency. Overall, we are very pleased with Kelly’s performance during the second quarter. We continue to grow revenue at 10 times the rate of our expenses, excluding restructuring, and delivered strong earnings growth despite pressure on our…

Thank you, Carl. Revenue totaled $1.4 billion, up 3.9% in constant currency compared to the second quarter last year. Nominal currency is down about 1.8% with the difference caused mainly by the continued weak European currency. So the negative impact of foreign currency on the revenue growth trend was over 500 basis points, similar to the impact we have seen in Q1. Now, consistent with Carl for the remainder of my comments, year-over-year comparisons are represented in constant currency. Staff and placement fees were down 6% year over year as we continued to experience declines in EMEA and APAC. That more than offset the 19% growth we saw in the Americas. In constant currency, overall gross profit was up $6.6 million, about 3%. Our gross profit rate was 16.1%, down 10 basis points compared to the second quarter last year, heavily influenced by lower perm fees. Our GP rate was lower than our expectations as a result of lower perm fees outside of the U.S. greater investment in our Kelly Connect business, and an unfavorable adjustment to our U.S. workers compensation expense. SG&A expenses were nearly flat year over year, which does include the impact of cost savings generated by our management simplification plan and reflects our continued focus on cost discipline. Included in Q2 2014 results were $1.8 million of restructuring costs. Our Q2 expense growth rate reflects what we said during our call last quarter. We will manage expenses in line with revenue growth. Earnings from operations were $11.5 million in the second quarter compared with 2014 earnings including restructuring charges of $7.7 million. These results reflect continued operating leverage similar to Q1 with about 85% of our GP growth dropped to the bottom line on a constant currency basis. Notwithstanding other Q2 2015 results are negatively impacted…

Thank you, Olivier. No question, Kelly is operating as a far more efficient organization in 2015, delivering very good leverage as we execute our strategy for growing revenue at roughly 10 times the rate of expenses excluding restructuring and we are nothing more than half of our GP growth to the bottom line. Our 2014 investments in PT and OCG are also yielding results, and we are delivering on the strategic plan that clearly aligns with market trends and customer needs. Accounts serviced through our U.S. branch network are delivering year-over-year growth in Kelly’s commercial core and delivering even stronger sequential and year-over-year growth than RPT specialties. Our investment in PT are yielding the results we expected. Our expanded salesforce is growing our PT customer pipeline, while our PT recruiting centers are filling new orders with our expanded talent pipelines. We are extremely pleased with the PT growth we are seeing in our U.S. branch network, and we expect that trend to continue through the balance of the year. Our centralized large account portfolio is more susceptible to client specific fluctuations. As project come to a close and as Kelly exercises pricing plan, there can be sharper variations from quarter to quarter. We are pleased to see signs of increased sequential and year-over-year PT order volume in our centralized accounts and we believe our expanded PT recruiting team will enable us to capture additional PT growth in the portfolio as the year progresses. We are also pleased with the trends we are seeing in our EMEA and APAC segments, which delivered nice leverage from increased revenue and lower expenses in the second quarter, turning in operating profits that align with our strategies in those regions. Our OCG segment continues to perform well, bringing new client into Kelly’s portfolio and expanding…

[Operator Instructions] And we will go to Tobey Sommer with SunTrust. Please go ahead.

I was worried about out Tobey, you are usually first in line.

Yes, all right, I still managed to make it. Your concern was occurred in recent of time I wanted to ask you about RPO. You mentioned it is down because of the natural resource customers. Can you put a little context around that, how big a slice of revenue is in that business that comes from natural resource customers? And outside of that area, are your RPO customers generally living up to their forecast in rate of hiring? Where are the flows of hiring compared to how you might have originally contemplated in those contracts? Thanks.

Thanks. We did not contemplate the drop in the price of oil and the impact that was going to have through the oil part of the natural resource mix, and we have been heavily involved with the oil portion of the natural resource market. That’s where the majority of the declines that we’ve been seeing in RPO demand have happened. Outside of the natural resource sector, volume is generally proceeding as we thought it would, consistent with employment growth and the demand for skilled labor in the various markets. Not on across-the-board systemic issue with employing, but a very specific issue to an industry we happen to be well focused in.

Right. How big a slice of RPO is natural resources?

We’ve not given that information and I don’t want to do it. If I am going to do it, I don’t want to do it imprecisely here. So we will see what we do in the future here, Tobey.

Okay. From a broader perspective, Carl , that the Company embarked on a strategy several quarters ago to change its distribution. Where are you versus your own expectations in being able to execute on strategy and how far along are we? Are we passed or a little bit behind your expectations for the effects of that to be visible on the P&L? Thank you.

I think what you’re seeing in OCG, starting with that, which is not tied to the distribution system but also was an important part of our strategic focus; we had looked for growth that continued to stay in the 20s. We had a quarter dip last quarter. It’s back in the range that we expected it to be in. Demand for OCG services both in the total supply chain as well as for point solutions is doing fine. Branch network, if anything, is ahead of some of my expectation, very solid growth once you separate the demand of the large account from the demands of local accounts. It has yielded the results that we were expecting to see and is going well. On the centralized account model, in terms of the service metrics, all of that is going well. Price discipline in the U.S., partly around ACA, partly around just setting some lines that we weren’t going to cross yielded a slightly larger impact than I think I might have expected, but important to do to say, this is what we are worth. This is what we’ll make. On the other hand, if you were inside the call today, very clearly talking about and acceleration in order demand and acceleration in fill rates and revenues, so I think that it is a little behind in totality of where I want, but right on if not ahead of service delivery quality. So I think you’re going to be – you will be seeing steady improvement in that portion of our service delivery model as the year plays out. Europe is volatile, as we all – European volatility this year was not expected, but being en coped well. And APAC is performing very, very well as a result of its restructuring.

Sure, I will ask one more question and I will get back in the queue. Could you comment on competition and I am asking the question in the context of proving some lower margin work. And as you said, ACA and kind of conversations with customers, where you are talking with them about the value you are providing and expect to get in return, is there a broader set of competitors underneath there, working – willing to accept lower prices and lower margins? Or is there some sort of individual company out there kind of competing in that way?

I think in terms of ACA, while I always hate to compliment everybody in the industry, the industry is showing pretty good price discipline. It’s clear that it’s a tax. It’s clear that the majority of the industry’s contracts provide a right to pass along those types of social benefit costs to the customers. It benefits our workers and the industry is behaving responsibly on that side. When you get to specific contracts, and specific pricing points, there is always – somebody will have a point need for a – or a possibility of lowering price. But again, I’m not – as you know, the industry often goes through its phases where somebody is identified as be in the low price cutter. But I think inside the industry, things are holding together well, and professional technical, in particular is. The price discipline is solid. I would say the large lid accounts because you have more pressure on those margins. Increased ACA costs are a much bigger proportion of gross profit markup on those accounts, increasing the costs from everything like workers comp and so on across the country again is disproportionately affecting the lid accounts. And so where I do see the price pressure discipline being most intense, it’s on the large commercial accounts that have a heavy lid concentration.

Thank you very much.

[Operator Instructions] Mr. Camden, there are no additional questions coming in.

Very good. Thank you, John. And thank you all for listening.