Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

HR Hatred

2»

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,455 ✭✭✭livedadream


    LadyBetty wrote: »
    Well after many years of working in multinationals, and currently in a smaller Irish company, I am left with the impression that HR staff are generally ditzy, fake (HIIII HOW ARE YOUUUU?) and a bit thick (they can't spell). They usually wear lovely clothes, I guess that is a good thing?

    I have to say ive read all the posts on this thread and this is the only one that actually offended me.

    i can totally understand people saying HR are only there to maintain the companies interest, id even go so far as to agree that HR can come across as two faced, its the nature of the role you have to be nice to everyone while sometimes planning redundancy's or managing people out. However you have a generalised a whole Department of employees, across numerous industries, in a sweeping statement.

    it would be the same as me saying all the finance people ive come across are nerdy pedantic number crunchers who dont see the people behind the cost analysis, who clearly have never gotten laid, are living at home with their mothers and 4 cats and have little to no social ability, but they do wear lovely grey suits, its not true and downright insulting.

    youre perpetuating a stereotype that females who work in HR departments are dolly birds,which is something, I and alot of my generation have fought against to prove our worth as educated, hard working young women who can stand with the men who overlook us as a bit of something to look at in the office, I sit in the C suite with the MD's and CEO's of companies and I do it while kicking ass and gaining respect for my skills and abilities, while wearing ''lovely clothes'' as you so eloquently put it- and four inch heels.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 192 ✭✭LadyBetty


    You might also have quoted my very next line in which I noted there are exceptions of course. And you sound like one of those. In my personal experience however a lot of HR have been that dolly bird stereotype you allude to.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,455 ✭✭✭livedadream


    LadyBetty wrote: »
    You might also have quoted my very next line in which I noted there are exceptions of course. And you sound like one of those. In my personal experience however a lot of HR have been that dolly bird stereotype you allude to.
    LadyBetty wrote: »
    There are exceptions of course,


    your argument was that the dolly bird type are the norm not the exceptions.

    and like i said i would argue that those people are the exceptions not the norm


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 192 ✭✭LadyBetty


    100% not my experience to date or I would have said as much.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,075 ✭✭✭skallywag


    ...

    youre perpetuating a stereotype that females who work in HR departments are dolly birds,which is something, I and alot of my generation have fought against to prove our worth as educated, hard working young women who can stand with the men who overlook us as a bit of something to look at in the office, I sit in the C suite with the MD's and CEO's of companies and I do it while kicking ass and gaining respect for my skills and abilities, while wearing ''lovely clothes'' as you so eloquently put it- and four inch heels.

    Interesting topic OP, but I think that you have left yourself down badly with the above post.

    In my own case I admire a HR function who will keep a cool and level head and represent me in a fair and balanced way when perhaps under pressure from above. Your little outbust above may have me wondering about that ...


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 21,504 Mod ✭✭✭✭Agent Smith


    dudara wrote: »
    We have an excellent HR department where I work. They're really focussed on learning and development and are a really good business partner.
    Posting from work yeah? :pac:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,623 ✭✭✭thegreatgonzo


    I have to say ive read all the posts on this thread and this is the only one that actually offended me.

    You found that more offensive than the other posts which said most HR people they came in contact with ate cake all the time and couldn't spell properly?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,455 ✭✭✭livedadream


    You found that more offensive than the posts which said most HR people they came in contact with ate cake all the time and couldn't spell properly?

    yeah... im not really bothered by people saying a whole employment sector cant spell because clearly thats ridiculous.

    and from my experience the cake thing is unfortunately pretty common, in my office currently there are two cakes: one for a persons leaving party and another for someone going on mat leave.

    We also have a delivery of bagels and sandwiches waiting for a meeting later, (staff training actually) as well as being the ones who have boxes of chocolates and sweets given to us by staff who are leaving so there is pretty much constantly food around the HR section and that has been the norm in 3-5 companies ive worked in the HR function in.

    i also have a bottle of Jameson in my filling cabinet that was given to me by a recruitment agent but sadly that remains sealed. maybe some stressful day ill crack it open :P:P:P


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,184 ✭✭✭✭_Brian


    The last company that i worked in that had hr dept was a multinational, what I found from working with them that they were like any other department.
    Good hr people are wonderful at their jobs and can help resolve issues with ease, applying a fair handed approach for both employees and company alike.
    Those that aren't so hot at their jobs make a managers life a nightmare with fear of making decisions grinding everything to a halt allowing employees to run amuck with few repercussions.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 995 ✭✭✭bigslick


    After reading over this thread I feel there are some interesting points. To be upfront, I work as a HR Business Partner in a large multinational so my view may be slightly biased in those terms, but will try and be subjective.

    Firstly are all HR blithering idiots? Not at all. I have worked with many individuals in HR who have taught me so much around not just HR but business itself. Will you find some people working in HR who are thoroughly useless and incompetent? Of course, and I have met and interviewed a fair few of these. That having been said, I am sure in every single role throughout Ireland there are individuals like that whether it be as accountants, marketing managers, lifeguard etc.

    Secondly, the view that HR is only looking out for the business and does not care about the employees. This is partly true, in that we work for the business and our processes are based on the guiding principles of the business. As an example, an individual may require 10 days unpaid leave to attend an international funeral, however the business policy states that we can only allow individuals to take a maximum of 5 days unpaid. This is not HR making these rules, this is the business. In this example I would consult with the manager on it, but at the end of the day the business makes the final decision and not us. On the other hand (again based on my role and company) if a manager is clearly abusing his/her power and bully or harassing or unfairly dismissing an employee and the issue is raised to me, I will ensure that that situation is dealt with appropriately and not just ‘go with the business line’.

    I feel from a lot of responses here (though I am open to correction) that the HR you are dealing with are perhaps in indigenous companies with between 100-500 employees. HR is looked at differently depending on the size of the business (in my experience) and the size of the budget. HR can be seen as necessary to a business or vital to a business, and the experiences you have with them can indicate which of these your company has vied for. Bear in mind that HR is a lot more than the ‘hiring & firing’ mindset that is out there, it involves succession planning, coaching & mentoring, developmental plans, being the ‘employment lawyer’ of the business for most labour relations issues and disputes, and many other areas, in a similar vein to as we all understand accounting is not just ‘crunching numbers in excel’.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,706 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble


    bigslick wrote: »
    As an example, an individual may require 10 days unpaid leave to attend an international funeral, however the business policy states that we can only allow individuals to take a maximum of 5 days unpaid. This is not HR making these rules, this is the business. In this example I would consult with the manager on it, but at the end of the day the business makes the final decision and not us.

    In fairness, policies like these are usually agreed by the business - but only after receiving advice and recommendations from HR. It would be pretty rare for "the business" to not accept those recommendations.

    And that policy in your example is just plain daft. Something like "Close family only, up to 3 days paid leave, copy of a death certificate must be supplied within one week of returning to work. Leave after that is unpaid, or annual leave may be used with the manager's agreement" is reasonable. But setting a cap on the maximum number of unpaid day is nuts. Would you really say to me "Sorry but you cannot have three weeks to attend your brother's funeral on the other side of the planet [because it requires a policy exemption and your manager doesn't like you so won't give it]" - leaving me with absolutely no choice but to resign and fail to work out my notice?

    bigslick wrote: »
    Bear in mind that HR is a lot more than the ‘hiring & firing’ mindset that is out there, it involves succession planning, coaching & mentoring, developmental plans, being the ‘employment lawyer’ of the business for most labour relations issues and disputes, and many other areas, in a similar vein to as we all understand accounting is not just ‘crunching numbers in excel’.

    I've spent a lot of time as a long-term agency worker placed at a MNC. I can say with total honesty that the "HR" provided by the agency does not include any of those functions you've mentioned. Strictly limited to hiring-administration, payroll and time-keeping. 'Tis galling when I have to sit alongside MNC employees, I'm doing pretty much the same or higher level work than they are, but they get all the HR-love you mention, while all I get is grief because I forgot to clock in one morning.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 995 ✭✭✭bigslick


    In fairness, policies like these are usually agreed by the business - but only after receiving advice and recommendations from HR. It would be pretty rare for "the business" to not accept those recommendations.

    And that policy in your example is just plain daft. Something like "Close family only, up to 3 days paid leave, copy of a death certificate must be supplied within one week of returning to work. Leave after that is unpaid, or annual leave may be used with the manager's agreement" is reasonable. But setting a cap on the maximum number of unpaid day is nuts. Would you really say to me "Sorry but you cannot have three weeks to attend your brother's funeral on the other side of the planet [because it requires a policy exemption and your manager doesn't like you so won't give it]" - leaving me with absolutely no choice but to resign and fail to work out my notice?

    I dont want to focus on policies as that is not really the point of this piece, however in this case yes the business would consult with HR. As I said I would consult with the manager to speak around this particular instance. Within my company we have policies that are mainly in place to avoid abuse of it, rather than as a standard. So in the case I used if the employee has a real situation that they require the time off, this can be ascertained by the manager and/or HR and discretion can be used. As im sure we are all aware, people can abuse policies, so if it was a case where the company promoted taking as much time as one needed, then people would abuse the system. Its a delicate balance but one which (at least in my company) benefits the employee based on the manager and/or HR discretion.

    I've spent a lot of time as a long-term agency worker placed at a MNC. I can say with total honesty that the "HR" provided by the agency does not include any of those functions you've mentioned. Strictly limited to hiring-administration, payroll and time-keeping. 'Tis galling when I have to sit alongside MNC employees, I'm doing pretty much the same or higher level work than they are, but they get all the HR-love you mention, while all I get is grief because I forgot to clock in one morning.

    I would mirror your thoughts here. There is a large drift between contractors (or agency workers) and employee's within a company. This is not just from a business perspective but also a legislative. Agencies do tend to enact the 'hiring and firing' mentality, and within the business itself the HR would be to a different level including a full suite of HR activities. This is unavoidable in some respects (payroll not handled by business, performance management not handled by business etc) however in terms of attention and engagement it would be my belief that individuals should be treated as equal as possible (based on limiting elements mentioned) so that the feelings of segregation is not felt.


Advertisement