As you all know, I don't hate HR.
I loathe HR.
Aside from an oppressive and growing socialist government, HR is a closely ranked second in terms of what is holding America back from it's halcyon days of 4%+ average RGDP growth. It certainly is the #1 non-public sector problem, and it embodies pretty much everything I hate about the anti-American forces - feminism, overregulation, anti-capitalism, legal/law/lawyers, socialism, affirmative action, etc.
But then I saw via Snarks "The Evil HR Lady."
Apparently, this lady DOES get it. Not only does she acknowledge most people view HR for the evil it is, she makes valid posts about labor and labor force relations. Most notably is her position that firms are failing to realize that facebook, myspace, blogs and other social media is the main means by which the latest generation communicates and that ultimately it's none of their damn business what is said on these sites. ie-if firms will discriminate against against social media users and go Gestapo on them, they will soon have no labor pool to chose from. One could make a very good argument it is age discrimination.
Naturally I don't think one sane HR lady is going to make a lick of difference. For every genuinely concerned and intellectually honest HR professional like her, there's 10 genuinely evil and power hungry HR ladies with no real intent to help her employer. So "The Evil HR Lady" will have to forgive me when I still stand by my pledge that when I am king, I will ban all HR departments.
8 comments:
"there's 10 genuinely evil and power hungry HR ladies with no real intent to help her employer"
Never attribute to malice that which can be satisfactorily explained by stupidity.
Wow, I'm honored to be labeled the one sane HR person out there.
And that's fine, when you're king you can do away with HR. Please do away with legal as well.
HR. as an industry, is the problem.
That does not mean individuals, or even individual company's HR departments, are equally evil and useless. There are some very good shining stars in that line of work. I have met them myself. (To be honest though, there are a tremendous number of useless morons for every one good one I have met.)
I was planning on writing a book called, 'The World is Run by Fat Women.' It was going to center on 30 years of bad experiences with HR.
Clearly, not all of the problems I've had came from women and not all of them were fat, but the image is an apt caricature. Many of them are bloated, bitter, bitches. I'm not surprised that your example of a sane HR person is slim and attractive. She hasn't succumbed to the HR Flavor Aid and swivel chair spread.
I worked in HR for many years, often the only male in the department. The mentality of the petty bureaucrat is to clear their inbox, NOT to accomplish anything. If they do accomplish something, its incidental to their activity. Admin actions that go back to the source are just as "done" as actions that are successfully completed. Actions done incorrectly are also "done" unless and until someone complains about it.
One might try to exonerate HR folks by saying that they merely help navigate the stormy seas of government regulations. Some do, but most of them have their claim to fame as being a captain on that ship of fools. They are expert applicators of stupid government regs. They facilitate the orderly imposition of chaos. Many lawyers do the same.
I made my fair share of mistakes, and served some time as a petty bureaucrat, so I claim no superior status. I claim only to be a reformed leach on society.
The trouble with staying in HR is that it consumes you. It becomes your specialty to the point you're incapable of doing anything else after a while. Even if you have other talents, HR will dominate your resume which will be screened by HR people.
"HR: Taking the 'human' out of human resources"
In the 80's, HR was only involved in the administration of benefits. It was never involved in the hiring process. Having HR involved in the hiring process is quite silly. For example, how can someone who has never worked as an engineer decide who is qualified to be hired for an engineering position? Only the engineering manager is capable of making such a determination.
Having been a private sector recruiter & HR professional for many years, I can tell you that you don't need to be an engineer to place and hire successful ones. Most hiring managers are not deft interviewers, especially when it comes to the soft skills....which are equally important. Frankly, we all know that if they've made it to the interview they have the technical skills required to do the job.
The problem with many HR pros is they are the department of no. They have no idea on how employee engagement affects productivity and they don't speak the language of finance. Many have zero leadership skills.
But there are a lot out there, like our lovable Evil HR Lady, who understand their role is to serve the business need.
What many of you are forgetting is that employment law and regulation is what has driven the growth of HR. Just sayin'.
I'm also one of those skinny, sane HR ladies. Believe it or not, there are more of us out there than you think.
Plaintiffs' attorneys call them "inhuman resources." Why? They are never on the employees' side, because they know who signs their paycheck, however, some get into power-tripping, aka "the red queen" type. ACTUALLY ENJOY THE "OFF WITH THEIR HEADS" ROUTINE.
This frequently costs companies valuable employees who fall victim to bullying, the gang of 5 routine, or someone out to get someone. The case of the three liars: OM and assistants had HR on speed dial...had a plan to eliminate a very productive worker...OM made an accusation, her two direct reports,wrote corroborating statements, the HR person bought the lie, hook, line and sinker, but never bothered to talk to the accused. Nobody in that bunch thought about what would happen when arbitration time came.
It did. The accuser couldn't quite keep her story straight, blamed hr for inaccurately reporting her statement, came up with a whole new version....didn't match the HR version, didn't match the witness statements.....under oath, the game of the three liars fell apart....oooo the weeping, the getting of red in the face, the need to take a break from testimony..ummmmm hummmm, the liars' tap dance. And HR????why should I follow policy and interview the accused....they'd just deny. (Most folk wrongly accused WOULD deny, ya think?)
The upshot? The company will pay out mucho $$$$$ because of 3 liars and an HR idiot. 'Course, corporations deserve to be slapped up 'long side the head for allowing their HR people to drive out good people.
Bottom line......Send the HR weenies with power craze and lust back to handling admin stuff where they won't contaminate your work force and cost big bucks.
Post a Comment