I have often been told that employers hire people they know to fill positions before they pick someone qualified for the position. Is this true? if so are there companies that prohibit the hiring of friends of friends and relatives of relatives?
Sure, lots of companies prohibit the hiring of relatives of current employees. I work in such a large company that this would be impractical, so we prohibit the hiring of relatives within the same department.
But friends? Honey, that's called networking and it's how the business world works. Unless the management is utterly incompetent (not saying such companies don't exist), they still hire qualified people--just not you. (That's what I'm getting out of your e-mail anyway. Why can't I find a job? Forgive me if I'm wrong or jumping to unwarrented conclusions.)
Hiring is an unpleasant and risky activity. Even though I harp on here that most employment in the United States is "at-will," meaning that a company can fire you for cause or no cause at any time, most companies don't terminate people willy-nillly. They have processes and procedures and just because termination is technically legal, they have to be concerned about lawsuits. (Even if a company wins a lawsuit they still have to pay legal bills.) Not to mention, no actual work gets done while you are dealing with a bad hire.
Because hiring is so risky, if Bob is a fabulous employee and he comes to me and says, "Hey, I worked with Karen at my previous company. She has all the skills needed for this vacant position and she's wonderful because of A, B, and C," then of course I'm going to interview Karen.
Karen gets an automatic bump up because Bob (who I know) has personally worked with her and recommends her. This is smart hiring, and not something to be stopped. (Not saying that hiring managers should automatically hire people who come recommended, but rather that these people are more likely to be a good fit.)
Now, of course, if Bob's reason for recommending Karen is "I understand I get a referral bonus if you hire her," she won't get that bump. "Hey, Karen was my college roommate, and dude, she's awesome!" probably will get an eyeroll from me.
Karen still needs to be qualified for the job. But, to an outsider who is trying to crack through the company fortress it can look like we only hire people's friends. This isn't likely to be true, but it can seem that way.
So, you need to start meeting people and networking. You also need to do a fabulous job at whatever company you are at now. Your co-workers may one day be in a position to recommend you. And heck, you may be in a position to to recommend them. Of course, networking has it's limitations. A recommendation from someone who worked with you for 5 years is going to pull a lot more weight than a recommendation from someone you exchanged business cards with at a mutual friend's birthday party.
Now, there are some problems with hiring via employee referral. One is that employees tend to be friends with people like themselves--same age, race, gender, socio-economic status. Fine, fine, fine, but if you've got affirmative action goals recruiting this way can make you over-represented in whatever hiring group you started with. (I seem to recall a court case where a cleaning company got sued for discrimination because almost all the employees were Korean. The case hinged on whether they were legally hiring people they knew or illegally discriminating against people who weren't Korean. I'd tell you how the case resolved, but that would involve either Googling (feasible)or going downstairs and pulling out my old constitutional law text book out and looking it up (ain't gonna happen).)
So, if you are recruiting, you need to use many methods to source your candidates. Referrals are great, but shouldn't be the be-all, end-all of existence.
If you are looking for a job, keep on it. Talk to everyone you know. Don't get angry and try not to get frustrated when it seems like you have to know someone to get a job. My first "real" job was at a company that was extremely difficult to get into. I didn't realize this (I was new to the area) and applied because I had the right skill set. I got the job even though I didn't know a soul in the company. People who had been recommended internally didn't get the job because they lacked a critical skill that I had. (In this case, the ability to do statistical analysis. Few HR people have that skill, which is a topic for another day.)
Friday, July 18, 2008
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Why Do You Want This Job?
I am a graduate looking for jobs. I frequently attend interviews and I am asked “ Why do you want to join this job?” I actually couldn’t reply anything.
In the same way I got a interview call from another company in India. They have a opening for software engineer job. They have asked me to update my details and have to write “Reason why I am interested in this job” in 300 words. Could you please help me out in this.
Well, I hate to burst your bubble, but no. I can't help you. Why? Because not only do I not want a job as a software engineer, my desire to move to India is, well, low.
But apparently you want to be a software engineer. That is good. Now tell me why you want to work for this company? IF you don't want to work for the company don't bother going through with the application.
They want to know why you want to work there because they want someone who wants this job, not just a job. They want to know if you've done your homework about the company. They want to know what you know about the company and why you will be a good fit. What is it about this company that makes you want to work there.
Since the position is for a software engineer and they are only looking for 300 words, they aren't after brilliant prose that will be published in the company newsletter. They just want to know why you want to work for this company.
Stop overthinking it, and just write out a draft. Have some trusted friends review it and make the necessary changes. If you don't know why you would want to work for this company, find out. Do your research. Find out.
My guess is that you didn't write a cover letter when you applied. I could be wrong, but a cover letter should establish why you want to work for this particular company.
Good luck!
In the same way I got a interview call from another company in India. They have a opening for software engineer job. They have asked me to update my details and have to write “Reason why I am interested in this job” in 300 words. Could you please help me out in this.
Well, I hate to burst your bubble, but no. I can't help you. Why? Because not only do I not want a job as a software engineer, my desire to move to India is, well, low.
But apparently you want to be a software engineer. That is good. Now tell me why you want to work for this company? IF you don't want to work for the company don't bother going through with the application.
They want to know why you want to work there because they want someone who wants this job, not just a job. They want to know if you've done your homework about the company. They want to know what you know about the company and why you will be a good fit. What is it about this company that makes you want to work there.
Since the position is for a software engineer and they are only looking for 300 words, they aren't after brilliant prose that will be published in the company newsletter. They just want to know why you want to work for this company.
Stop overthinking it, and just write out a draft. Have some trusted friends review it and make the necessary changes. If you don't know why you would want to work for this company, find out. Do your research. Find out.
My guess is that you didn't write a cover letter when you applied. I could be wrong, but a cover letter should establish why you want to work for this particular company.
Good luck!
Monday, July 14, 2008
The Strangest Vacation Policy I've Ever Seen
We are a very small company and, up until now, haven’t had a need for anything more than a vacation policy. Recently, I have been placed in charge of creating a sick leave policy or PTO policy. My research has lead me to wonder about the legality of our vacation policy. Basically we are given a set number of days off for various years of service. Where the issue lies is taking the vacation time.
If vacation is taken during the months of November through February, we are allowed to use ½ day of paid vacation time per full day off; if vacation is taken during the months of March, April, September and October, vacation time is day for day; if vacation is taken during the months of May through August, 1 ½ days of paid vacation time is used per day off. So if I take 5 day vacation in January, I only have to use 2 ½ days of my paid vacation time. If I take the same vacation in July, I have to use 7 ½ days of my paid vacation time. Bonus in the winter, but for those of us who have school-age children, the summer months are family vacation time and time off from school in the winter is limited.
Do you have any insight into this? Is it legal to require employees to use their vacation time in this manner?
Not a lawyer and not going to comment on the legalities. I am going to comment that you are nuts if you think the only official policy you need is a vacation one, but I'm now going to leave that alone as well.
On the one hand, I think this vacation policy is brilliant! It would effectively encourage winter vacations and discourage summer vacations. I assume you have a business that is busier in the summer. Or perhaps you just don't want everyone on vacation at the same time.
On the other hand, I think, are you people on crack? Talk about discriminating against parents of school age children! Now, honestly, my oldest child starts kindergarten this fall (sob!), so up until this September, I would have loved your policy. I'd much rather go places on the off season anyway. But, starting September 2 I'd be really ticked about it. Not only do I get the priviledge of spending all my vacations with other people's annoying children, now my vacation time is cut! In all honesty, I'd start looking for a new job right about now.
Yes, you heard me. That policy alone would make me start looking for a new job. I love vacation. Do you hear me? I love it. I use every allotted vacation day. Every.single.one.
So, anyway, I'm intrigued as to what other people think. I'd think there would have to be a pretty strong business reason for such a policy. If there is one, I might be able to get behind it. Otherwise, say goodbye to people who can't (easily) take vacations during the winter.
If vacation is taken during the months of November through February, we are allowed to use ½ day of paid vacation time per full day off; if vacation is taken during the months of March, April, September and October, vacation time is day for day; if vacation is taken during the months of May through August, 1 ½ days of paid vacation time is used per day off. So if I take 5 day vacation in January, I only have to use 2 ½ days of my paid vacation time. If I take the same vacation in July, I have to use 7 ½ days of my paid vacation time. Bonus in the winter, but for those of us who have school-age children, the summer months are family vacation time and time off from school in the winter is limited.
Do you have any insight into this? Is it legal to require employees to use their vacation time in this manner?
Not a lawyer and not going to comment on the legalities. I am going to comment that you are nuts if you think the only official policy you need is a vacation one, but I'm now going to leave that alone as well.
On the one hand, I think this vacation policy is brilliant! It would effectively encourage winter vacations and discourage summer vacations. I assume you have a business that is busier in the summer. Or perhaps you just don't want everyone on vacation at the same time.
On the other hand, I think, are you people on crack? Talk about discriminating against parents of school age children! Now, honestly, my oldest child starts kindergarten this fall (sob!), so up until this September, I would have loved your policy. I'd much rather go places on the off season anyway. But, starting September 2 I'd be really ticked about it. Not only do I get the priviledge of spending all my vacations with other people's annoying children, now my vacation time is cut! In all honesty, I'd start looking for a new job right about now.
Yes, you heard me. That policy alone would make me start looking for a new job. I love vacation. Do you hear me? I love it. I use every allotted vacation day. Every.single.one.
So, anyway, I'm intrigued as to what other people think. I'd think there would have to be a pretty strong business reason for such a policy. If there is one, I might be able to get behind it. Otherwise, say goodbye to people who can't (easily) take vacations during the winter.
Unfair Discipline
I was issued a written warning for failure to use the proper channels to report a complaint, referencing a policy from the handbook. This stems from a private conversation I had with another manager regarding how my boss/hostile environment is making me sick.
The other manager was concerned and reported to HR (or as some would say "threw me under the bus"). When I read the policy, I found that there was a paragraph that stated 'if you do not feel comfortable talking with your direct supervisor, you can talk with any other member of management', which I did.
I told the HR lady and my boss that i was not making a complaint and later emailed my comments and asked that the warning be revoked because it had not been violated. No response. I have been with the company for 12 years and have always received good performance reviews and have never experienced anything like this. I am sick over this. Our workplace is very dysfunctional and policies are broken every day without discipline (including harassment, safety violations, etc.).
The injustice of it all is what really bothers me. Can an employer just pick out one employee and one policy and decide to enforce it? I am under the care of several therapists and a doc and need to be medicated to go to work. I am feverishly looking for another job, but am sure that it will create a financial burden to my family. Thanks for any help you can provide.
You are clearly upset over this incident, but if nothing else was said, it is possible that the HR lady realizes she made a mistake and is too embarrassed to admit it to you, so she's ignoring it, hoping it will go away.
Or she has 112 unread messages in her inbox and hasn't gotten to yours yet.
Or she's a complete idiot who writes someone up for making a complaint according to the company's established procedures.
Take your pick.
I'm glad you are looking for a new job, because you aren't happy at this one. But, you aren't going to find a better one until you calm down and process what happened. Were there consequences to you, other than the write up in your file? Demotion, bad assignments, or something similar? I ask because this doesn't seem, in and of itself, something to be so horrified at that you are sick over it. This fear and panic are going to come across in your job interviews and it may prevent you from getting a good job. There ARE good jobs available. Being positive will help you in your search.
You also need to come up with an answer to the "why are you looking for a new job?" question that doesn't involve any of this. It needs to be an accurate answer, but without being negative towards your current company.
Now, the above was the answer to the question you didn't ask. Here's the answer to the question you did ask: Companies should apply their policies fairly across the board. No one should ever be punished for bringing a legitimate complaint to management. It should always be perfectly acceptable to approach a member of a management team with your concerns.
My advice to you is to make an appointment with your boss to apologize for not speaking with her first, and to ask what you can do to help resolve the issue. I realize you were acting within policy when you went to another manager. I realize you did nothing wrong. I also realize that you are miserable and if something doesn't change you will continue to be miserable and it will affect your ability to find a new job. Be willing to work with your boss to find a solution.
For future reference, except in the rarest of rare circumstances, you should go to your boss first. Sidestepping her can cause animosity to rise from the boss. You should only go to someone else if you have attempted to resolve the issue with your boss. Remember also that even if you go to happy hour with this management team member you spoke to, it's still business. When you are with people you work with, you are absolutely at work, regardless of the setting.
I don't know what your complaint was about, but if it was something involving safety, harassment, or an illegal practice, this manager was required to act. You can't come up to me and say, "Hey Evil HR Lady, the funniest thing happened on the factory floor yesterday. Karen and Steve were having a water gun fight!" and not expect me to act on it.
Now some of you are shaking your heads and wondering why on earth I'd care about a harmless water fight. Well, water on the floor could be a safety hazard--hello, OSHA violation. Depending on the product it could cause contamination and be an FDA violation. Do you want to have product fail? Me neither. Perhaps neither did the manager you confided in.
The other manager was concerned and reported to HR (or as some would say "threw me under the bus"). When I read the policy, I found that there was a paragraph that stated 'if you do not feel comfortable talking with your direct supervisor, you can talk with any other member of management', which I did.
I told the HR lady and my boss that i was not making a complaint and later emailed my comments and asked that the warning be revoked because it had not been violated. No response. I have been with the company for 12 years and have always received good performance reviews and have never experienced anything like this. I am sick over this. Our workplace is very dysfunctional and policies are broken every day without discipline (including harassment, safety violations, etc.).
The injustice of it all is what really bothers me. Can an employer just pick out one employee and one policy and decide to enforce it? I am under the care of several therapists and a doc and need to be medicated to go to work. I am feverishly looking for another job, but am sure that it will create a financial burden to my family. Thanks for any help you can provide.
You are clearly upset over this incident, but if nothing else was said, it is possible that the HR lady realizes she made a mistake and is too embarrassed to admit it to you, so she's ignoring it, hoping it will go away.
Or she has 112 unread messages in her inbox and hasn't gotten to yours yet.
Or she's a complete idiot who writes someone up for making a complaint according to the company's established procedures.
Take your pick.
I'm glad you are looking for a new job, because you aren't happy at this one. But, you aren't going to find a better one until you calm down and process what happened. Were there consequences to you, other than the write up in your file? Demotion, bad assignments, or something similar? I ask because this doesn't seem, in and of itself, something to be so horrified at that you are sick over it. This fear and panic are going to come across in your job interviews and it may prevent you from getting a good job. There ARE good jobs available. Being positive will help you in your search.
You also need to come up with an answer to the "why are you looking for a new job?" question that doesn't involve any of this. It needs to be an accurate answer, but without being negative towards your current company.
Now, the above was the answer to the question you didn't ask. Here's the answer to the question you did ask: Companies should apply their policies fairly across the board. No one should ever be punished for bringing a legitimate complaint to management. It should always be perfectly acceptable to approach a member of a management team with your concerns.
My advice to you is to make an appointment with your boss to apologize for not speaking with her first, and to ask what you can do to help resolve the issue. I realize you were acting within policy when you went to another manager. I realize you did nothing wrong. I also realize that you are miserable and if something doesn't change you will continue to be miserable and it will affect your ability to find a new job. Be willing to work with your boss to find a solution.
For future reference, except in the rarest of rare circumstances, you should go to your boss first. Sidestepping her can cause animosity to rise from the boss. You should only go to someone else if you have attempted to resolve the issue with your boss. Remember also that even if you go to happy hour with this management team member you spoke to, it's still business. When you are with people you work with, you are absolutely at work, regardless of the setting.
I don't know what your complaint was about, but if it was something involving safety, harassment, or an illegal practice, this manager was required to act. You can't come up to me and say, "Hey Evil HR Lady, the funniest thing happened on the factory floor yesterday. Karen and Steve were having a water gun fight!" and not expect me to act on it.
Now some of you are shaking your heads and wondering why on earth I'd care about a harmless water fight. Well, water on the floor could be a safety hazard--hello, OSHA violation. Depending on the product it could cause contamination and be an FDA violation. Do you want to have product fail? Me neither. Perhaps neither did the manager you confided in.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Training to the Rescue
The Emergency Room is about to get some communication training.
Can I just say one more time that we need business experience if we're going to be taken seriously? Yes, HR isn't specifically mentioned, but yhis is undoubtedly something HR has a hand in. I think it illustrates why so many people think HR is worthless. We run in and announce we're going to fix a communication problem without understanding what "problems" really exist. It's not like people don't know how to talk to each other.
And maybe the ER is really having a true communication breakdown. It may truly be causing the problems. The staff, however, doesn't think so. (Or at least our writer doesn't think so.) He states:
And I can hear a communal HR clucking of tongues saying, "well, if you could communicate with each other more clearly, you would be more safe and efficient." Maybe so, but they aren't going to listen to anything the trainer says. Why? Because the trainer has no credibility, the trainees don't think there is a problem, and the course hasn't been designed based on the perceived needs of the department.
I realize that is a lot harder than pulling a "communication" class out of our HR bag of tricks, but it would also make it worth everyone's time.
The docs met with the “communication expert” the other day who is a social working, behavioral health RN (who I am sure has not practiced in years).
Can I just say one more time that we need business experience if we're going to be taken seriously? Yes, HR isn't specifically mentioned, but yhis is undoubtedly something HR has a hand in. I think it illustrates why so many people think HR is worthless. We run in and announce we're going to fix a communication problem without understanding what "problems" really exist. It's not like people don't know how to talk to each other.
And maybe the ER is really having a true communication breakdown. It may truly be causing the problems. The staff, however, doesn't think so. (Or at least our writer doesn't think so.) He states:
We don’t need communication classes, we need “What makes sense to run an ER safely and efficiently” classes!
And I can hear a communal HR clucking of tongues saying, "well, if you could communicate with each other more clearly, you would be more safe and efficient." Maybe so, but they aren't going to listen to anything the trainer says. Why? Because the trainer has no credibility, the trainees don't think there is a problem, and the course hasn't been designed based on the perceived needs of the department.
I realize that is a lot harder than pulling a "communication" class out of our HR bag of tricks, but it would also make it worth everyone's time.
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
Carnival of HR
The latest Carnival of HR is now up at Changeboard. This is the themed carnival that caused our recent controversy so head on over and see what it's all about.
Facility Closing
Is a company required to disclose to an employee that it has plans to close the facility at which they were hired to work? I was recruited by a company, that after 4 months of employing me, announced plans to close the facility. In the all-employee meeting when the closure announcement was made it was stated that the decision to close this facility had been made more than 6 months earlier. It seems to me that at the very least common decency would dictate they tell me, but does the law? I’m a bit irritated as I left a position that I could still be working at.
Quick, short answer: No. Longer also true answer: Because it is a facility closure, it would be covered by the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN), which means they either have to give you 60 days notice, or pay you for 60 days following notice, or a combination of the two.
Now my long, drawn out answer. Things like this make my blood boil. It's entirely possible that the person/people who hired you had no idea. Senior Management wasn't ready to tell anyone their plans so they set out to ruin people's lives. Hello, you can do a hiring freeze without telling everyone your secret plant closing plans. It's also entirely possible that they did know and didn't care. A third possibility is that the decision had been made to close the facility if they didn't sell it--and they were operating in the hopes that they would sell it.
I am of the opinion that part of the reason this company has to shut down a facility is that their management is so concerned about covering their own behinds that they forget about the people who work for them. If you take a look at the Fortune Top 100 Companies to Work For you'll also notice that these companies are profitable. Treat your people right, they'll treat your customers right, and you'll all make money together.
So, is there anything you can do about this? Probably not. You could sue for breech of contract, but undoubtedly your offer letter specifically mentioned that you are an "at will" employee, so no contract implied. I hope you get a nice severance package, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for one. Do know that they need to give you an official WARN notice 60 days before your last day at work OR pay you for at least 60 days after you quit working. If they don't do that, then you could sue. (There are exceptions to WARN, but from what you've told me, this company wouldn't qualify-except perhaps on size, which my brilliant commenter just reminded me of.)
And now, polish up your resume and hit the pavement. It stinks. It's unfair. It's even unethical (in my never to be humble opinion). But, it's life.
Quick, short answer: No. Longer also true answer: Because it is a facility closure, it would be covered by the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN), which means they either have to give you 60 days notice, or pay you for 60 days following notice, or a combination of the two.
Now my long, drawn out answer. Things like this make my blood boil. It's entirely possible that the person/people who hired you had no idea. Senior Management wasn't ready to tell anyone their plans so they set out to ruin people's lives. Hello, you can do a hiring freeze without telling everyone your secret plant closing plans. It's also entirely possible that they did know and didn't care. A third possibility is that the decision had been made to close the facility if they didn't sell it--and they were operating in the hopes that they would sell it.
I am of the opinion that part of the reason this company has to shut down a facility is that their management is so concerned about covering their own behinds that they forget about the people who work for them. If you take a look at the Fortune Top 100 Companies to Work For you'll also notice that these companies are profitable. Treat your people right, they'll treat your customers right, and you'll all make money together.
So, is there anything you can do about this? Probably not. You could sue for breech of contract, but undoubtedly your offer letter specifically mentioned that you are an "at will" employee, so no contract implied. I hope you get a nice severance package, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for one. Do know that they need to give you an official WARN notice 60 days before your last day at work OR pay you for at least 60 days after you quit working. If they don't do that, then you could sue. (There are exceptions to WARN, but from what you've told me, this company wouldn't qualify-except perhaps on size, which my brilliant commenter just reminded me of.)
And now, polish up your resume and hit the pavement. It stinks. It's unfair. It's even unethical (in my never to be humble opinion). But, it's life.
Wednesday, July 02, 2008
Career Changes and Salary
I want to join the wonderful world of HR because it is just so darn interesting. I really think I could be a good HR analyst going into comp and benefits since I have been in consulting for six years and have a lot of financial data analysis, communication, and customer service skills. My issue is...when I am asked for my past salary, I am afraid to put down what I was really making before I dropped out of consulting (in the high 70's) because I don't want to be taken out of the pool of applicants. I want to be truthful but maybe the truth will hurt. What do you think?
Don't sell yourself short.
I've been telling people for years that if they want to be an effective HR person, they need to get experience on the business side. You have experience on the business side. (Well, perhaps. Some of the consultants I've met--well, let's just say a monkey could have done what they did. Well, maybe not a monkey unless the monkey knew power point. But, perhaps a toddler. One of those toddlers in the repeating stage of life. You know, where they have to repeat everything someone else says? Because, I've seen companies pay huge amounts of money to have consultants come in and "solve a problem." The consultant then sets up meetings where the employees that Senior Management refuse to take seriously tell the consultant what the problem is and how to fix it. The consultant then writes that up in a power point presentation and presents it. Ta-da! No thought involved. But, I digress.)
I don't know where you live or what industry you'd want to work in, but where I live and in my industry a comp analyst would not be out of line asking for a salary in the $70,000s or higher. You should apply for HR jobs in the same industry where you've been consulting. It makes your experience relevant.
Of course, if that kind of salary would be excessive in your area and industry then just make it clear that you are looking to change careers and you are willing to take the salary that comes with it. But, don't think you'd be walking into an analyst job with no experience. Analyzing is analyzing and you've done that. Just with different data. We can train you how to look at compensation data. It's harder to train you about the business side of things.
You may have noticed that senior people seem to jump around to jobs that they've had little experience in, yet we pay them a boatload of cash. Why? We're after their management skills and their ability to understand, learn, analyze, hire the right people and make decisions. Figure out what your skills are and sell yourself on those. Set up some informational interviews to learn about what a compensation analyst really does. (Please read the link first, or Ask a Manager will haunt me.) You should be able to see how your skills can apply there.
Good luck and welcome to the world of HR.
Don't sell yourself short.
I've been telling people for years that if they want to be an effective HR person, they need to get experience on the business side. You have experience on the business side. (Well, perhaps. Some of the consultants I've met--well, let's just say a monkey could have done what they did. Well, maybe not a monkey unless the monkey knew power point. But, perhaps a toddler. One of those toddlers in the repeating stage of life. You know, where they have to repeat everything someone else says? Because, I've seen companies pay huge amounts of money to have consultants come in and "solve a problem." The consultant then sets up meetings where the employees that Senior Management refuse to take seriously tell the consultant what the problem is and how to fix it. The consultant then writes that up in a power point presentation and presents it. Ta-da! No thought involved. But, I digress.)
I don't know where you live or what industry you'd want to work in, but where I live and in my industry a comp analyst would not be out of line asking for a salary in the $70,000s or higher. You should apply for HR jobs in the same industry where you've been consulting. It makes your experience relevant.
Of course, if that kind of salary would be excessive in your area and industry then just make it clear that you are looking to change careers and you are willing to take the salary that comes with it. But, don't think you'd be walking into an analyst job with no experience. Analyzing is analyzing and you've done that. Just with different data. We can train you how to look at compensation data. It's harder to train you about the business side of things.
You may have noticed that senior people seem to jump around to jobs that they've had little experience in, yet we pay them a boatload of cash. Why? We're after their management skills and their ability to understand, learn, analyze, hire the right people and make decisions. Figure out what your skills are and sell yourself on those. Set up some informational interviews to learn about what a compensation analyst really does. (Please read the link first, or Ask a Manager will haunt me.) You should be able to see how your skills can apply there.
Good luck and welcome to the world of HR.
Public Service Announcement
This is completely off topic, and I apologize for it. On Monday, one of my friends was killed in a car crash. Her parents, who were with her, are in critical condition and the doctors don't expect her mother to survive. My friend was 46.
An 18 year old girl ran a stop sign and t-boned them. She walked away with minor injuries. She was also text messaging while driving.
Please don't do that. Texting requires that you use your hands for something other than steering and your eyes for something other than looking.
If your teenager is texting while driving, please take her phone and her car away from her.
Not only is my friend dead, this 18 year old girl has to live knowing her stupidity caused someone else's death. I don't think you would want to be in either position.
An 18 year old girl ran a stop sign and t-boned them. She walked away with minor injuries. She was also text messaging while driving.
Please don't do that. Texting requires that you use your hands for something other than steering and your eyes for something other than looking.
If your teenager is texting while driving, please take her phone and her car away from her.
Not only is my friend dead, this 18 year old girl has to live knowing her stupidity caused someone else's death. I don't think you would want to be in either position.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Carnival Poll
We're having a bit of a "discussion" behind the scenes regarding the Carnival of HR. The question is, should a host be able to require submissions on a certain theme, or should they just deal with whatever gets submitted.
My opinion is that I have no opposition to an occasional theme, but I wouldn't want it to be a requirement for every carnival. Some dates just scream theme. (Well, at least, to me, they do.)
So, vote in this poll. We'll go with whatever the consensus is.
My opinion is that I have no opposition to an occasional theme, but I wouldn't want it to be a requirement for every carnival. Some dates just scream theme. (Well, at least, to me, they do.)
So, vote in this poll. We'll go with whatever the consensus is.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Carnival of HR
I know. It's a day late. (Unless I get distracted and then it will be two days late.) I should be fired. In fact, this isn't the only reason I should be fired. Let that be our carnival theme: Reasons to fire Evil HR Lady.
1. HR Wench writes about the Americans With Disabilities act and Age Discrimination in answering a question about a school teacher. I'm neither disabled nor over 40, so I'm not a likely candidate for a law suit. Therefore, I'm easy to fire.
2. Chris Young thinks HR really doesn't want to reduce turnover--it's too scary. David Wentworth at even tells you how to downsize. So, getting rid of me is no problem at all.
3. John Ingham has his Mojo. Then Amit Avasthi talks about a new term Glocalisation. Your talent is where it's at. You need to be able to see it to bring it out. Sounds like it would work with Mojo. These are two words not normally in my vocabulary, so I should definitely be terminated.
4. Susan Heathfield talks about knowing your audience. You see, it's not all about you--it's about your audience. Well, I want it to be all about me.
5. Micheal Moore presents the E-Verify nightmare. And, Recruitment 2.0 talks about Northern Ireland's reporting requirements (Catholic or Protestant?). Never mind firing me. Just shoot me now.
6. Gautam Ghosh gives us 5 Skills for Success. Being positive is one of them. Well, Ask a Manager positively does not like Employee of the Month Programs. I'll join her in that negativity, which, I guess, means Guatam can fire both of us. Except that Ask A Manager is correct about employee of the month programs being a poor substitute for real retention strategies, so maybe fire me and promote her. But, speaking of negativity, HR Minion gives us signs that an employee has gone negative.
7. Wally Bock wants to be Left Alone in order to have time to reflect and make good decisions. He says this is important for leadership. Dan McCarthy also addresses good ideas for leaders through a Leadership Exchange program. Now, if only I could get fired so I could go work for Wally or Dan.
8. Alvaro Fernandez presents a new book, Sway, and discusses why smart brains makes stupid decisions. People with smart brains often end up in middle management, which then turns them, well read Wayne Turmel's The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Cubicle and find out. Let's just say that I have a smart brain which made a stupid decision to over-schedule her Wednesday, resulting in a late carnival. Definitely a fireable offense.
9. Lisa tells us how to Crush Positive Employee Relations. I should be fired because I took it as a delightful "how to" guide, instead of the "how not to guide" it really is.
10. Michael D. Haberman got his seat at the table stolen. (Okay, not his, but still.) He reminds us to get out of HR to learn the business. I should be fired so that I'm forced to escape.
11. Totally Consumed tells us to be honest when providing job references. The Career Encourager reminds us that, in a job search competition isn't a bad thing. But, Denise O'Berry reminds us that after we're hired, we need to make sure we can trust our team even when we don't see them daily. It's all so kind and friendly, that there isn't really a reason to fire me in these posts. So, I guess I'll continue blogging.
1. HR Wench writes about the Americans With Disabilities act and Age Discrimination in answering a question about a school teacher. I'm neither disabled nor over 40, so I'm not a likely candidate for a law suit. Therefore, I'm easy to fire.
2. Chris Young thinks HR really doesn't want to reduce turnover--it's too scary. David Wentworth at even tells you how to downsize. So, getting rid of me is no problem at all.
3. John Ingham has his Mojo. Then Amit Avasthi talks about a new term Glocalisation. Your talent is where it's at. You need to be able to see it to bring it out. Sounds like it would work with Mojo. These are two words not normally in my vocabulary, so I should definitely be terminated.
4. Susan Heathfield talks about knowing your audience. You see, it's not all about you--it's about your audience. Well, I want it to be all about me.
5. Micheal Moore presents the E-Verify nightmare. And, Recruitment 2.0 talks about Northern Ireland's reporting requirements (Catholic or Protestant?). Never mind firing me. Just shoot me now.
6. Gautam Ghosh gives us 5 Skills for Success. Being positive is one of them. Well, Ask a Manager positively does not like Employee of the Month Programs. I'll join her in that negativity, which, I guess, means Guatam can fire both of us. Except that Ask A Manager is correct about employee of the month programs being a poor substitute for real retention strategies, so maybe fire me and promote her. But, speaking of negativity, HR Minion gives us signs that an employee has gone negative.
7. Wally Bock wants to be Left Alone in order to have time to reflect and make good decisions. He says this is important for leadership. Dan McCarthy also addresses good ideas for leaders through a Leadership Exchange program. Now, if only I could get fired so I could go work for Wally or Dan.
8. Alvaro Fernandez presents a new book, Sway, and discusses why smart brains makes stupid decisions. People with smart brains often end up in middle management, which then turns them, well read Wayne Turmel's The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Cubicle and find out. Let's just say that I have a smart brain which made a stupid decision to over-schedule her Wednesday, resulting in a late carnival. Definitely a fireable offense.
9. Lisa tells us how to Crush Positive Employee Relations. I should be fired because I took it as a delightful "how to" guide, instead of the "how not to guide" it really is.
10. Michael D. Haberman got his seat at the table stolen. (Okay, not his, but still.) He reminds us to get out of HR to learn the business. I should be fired so that I'm forced to escape.
11. Totally Consumed tells us to be honest when providing job references. The Career Encourager reminds us that, in a job search competition isn't a bad thing. But, Denise O'Berry reminds us that after we're hired, we need to make sure we can trust our team even when we don't see them daily. It's all so kind and friendly, that there isn't really a reason to fire me in these posts. So, I guess I'll continue blogging.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
It's Just Not Working
Expat question for you: I am recently hired by a large international Hospitality organization. The welcome, after the very aggressive recruiting, has been disappointing.
Somebody hinted at the possibility that "the company had let me down" during my probation time and therefor could be found responsible for my relocation costs. (Normally, if the employee resigns during their 3 months probation time, the cost for the return tickt and moving expenses falls back on the employee.) What exactly does this mean: the co. has let someone down on their contract?
As I am in month one of my probation time, I am kind of curious what the answer is.
I have no idea what your company policy is. I have no idea what country you are now located in. I'm going to answer this based on my worldview, so it may or may not apply.
So, you don't like the job. There's no technical breach of contract (that I can divine from a short question--which I encouage short questions as they save me the editing time) unless you got here and they said, "oooh, that offer letter, we're not going to be paying you that salary and so much for relocation costs. You have to repay everything we've already spent." Instead, you don't like it.
In my world, we'd say tough cookies. Now, we'd say tough cookies to your face, but behind the scenes we'd be screaming at the recuiter and the hiring manager who brought you in with tales of greatness and then dumped you into reality.
Can I say it again? Let's be honest when we are recruiting. Let's tell our candidates what the problems are. Best interview I ever had (and I took the job, by the way) was when the hiring manager said to me, "I'll be honest. There's a lot of policitical stuff going on. I'll try to protect you from some of it, but I can't guarentee you won't get caught up in it." She then warned me that her boss was, shall we say, unstable and would yell and scream but rewarded people who put up with her shenanigans with high pay raises. I KNEW what I was getting into. Fortunately for me, her boss was fired three weeks after I started. But even if she hadn't been, I had no illusions going in.
But, it's too late for that. You're there and you don't like it. But, you've only been there for one month. ONE MONTH! You only have to stay for 3 to not have to repay your relocation costs (which seem very small, considering). My advice to you? Suck it up. Three months aren't going to kill you and you may find out you like it better then you thought you did. New jobs are often awkward and you start to feel stupid because you don't understand how the company operates. And, since you are a new country, there is a new culture to go with it.
What I would do is first go to your manager and explain your concerns. She may be able to come up with a solution. Perhaps change some aspect of you job to make it a better fit for you. She doesn't really want to go recruiting again. However, if she's just as annoyed with you as you are with the job, she may feel it's the best deal to hand you a return ticket home and wish you well.
Unless the country you are in has laws that vary from this, they are under no obligation to pay for your return because you are "unsatisfied" with the job. If you, contractually, have to repay for terminating voluntarily in less than x number of years, you'll have to repay.
This can be one of the reasons jobs with relocation are so scary (both domestic and international). You don't really know if you'll love a job until you get there (or a town, for that matter). But, you're on the hook for a huge sum of money if you
don't stick it out. (Full relocation can cost a ton of money--especially international relcations. We're talking in excess of $100,000.) I advise people to relocate cautiously.
But, managers don't want an unhappy employee either. So, talk with your boss. Work on a solution. If that doesn't work stick it out three months and graciously resign. Getting yourself home will be on your own dime, but so be it.
Somebody hinted at the possibility that "the company had let me down" during my probation time and therefor could be found responsible for my relocation costs. (Normally, if the employee resigns during their 3 months probation time, the cost for the return tickt and moving expenses falls back on the employee.) What exactly does this mean: the co. has let someone down on their contract?
As I am in month one of my probation time, I am kind of curious what the answer is.
I have no idea what your company policy is. I have no idea what country you are now located in. I'm going to answer this based on my worldview, so it may or may not apply.
So, you don't like the job. There's no technical breach of contract (that I can divine from a short question--which I encouage short questions as they save me the editing time) unless you got here and they said, "oooh, that offer letter, we're not going to be paying you that salary and so much for relocation costs. You have to repay everything we've already spent." Instead, you don't like it.
In my world, we'd say tough cookies. Now, we'd say tough cookies to your face, but behind the scenes we'd be screaming at the recuiter and the hiring manager who brought you in with tales of greatness and then dumped you into reality.
Can I say it again? Let's be honest when we are recruiting. Let's tell our candidates what the problems are. Best interview I ever had (and I took the job, by the way) was when the hiring manager said to me, "I'll be honest. There's a lot of policitical stuff going on. I'll try to protect you from some of it, but I can't guarentee you won't get caught up in it." She then warned me that her boss was, shall we say, unstable and would yell and scream but rewarded people who put up with her shenanigans with high pay raises. I KNEW what I was getting into. Fortunately for me, her boss was fired three weeks after I started. But even if she hadn't been, I had no illusions going in.
But, it's too late for that. You're there and you don't like it. But, you've only been there for one month. ONE MONTH! You only have to stay for 3 to not have to repay your relocation costs (which seem very small, considering). My advice to you? Suck it up. Three months aren't going to kill you and you may find out you like it better then you thought you did. New jobs are often awkward and you start to feel stupid because you don't understand how the company operates. And, since you are a new country, there is a new culture to go with it.
What I would do is first go to your manager and explain your concerns. She may be able to come up with a solution. Perhaps change some aspect of you job to make it a better fit for you. She doesn't really want to go recruiting again. However, if she's just as annoyed with you as you are with the job, she may feel it's the best deal to hand you a return ticket home and wish you well.
Unless the country you are in has laws that vary from this, they are under no obligation to pay for your return because you are "unsatisfied" with the job. If you, contractually, have to repay for terminating voluntarily in less than x number of years, you'll have to repay.
This can be one of the reasons jobs with relocation are so scary (both domestic and international). You don't really know if you'll love a job until you get there (or a town, for that matter). But, you're on the hook for a huge sum of money if you
don't stick it out. (Full relocation can cost a ton of money--especially international relcations. We're talking in excess of $100,000.) I advise people to relocate cautiously.
But, managers don't want an unhappy employee either. So, talk with your boss. Work on a solution. If that doesn't work stick it out three months and graciously resign. Getting yourself home will be on your own dime, but so be it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
