HRChick
Seattle, WA
Female, 39
I'm the head of HR for a leading digital media company. I'm responsible for making my company an amazing place to work - or at least I'll go down trying! In short, I set the strategic direction for the HR function of the organization. I wear many hats: member of the executive team, confidant and advisor to my peers regarding people matters, as well as an advocate for all people that work hard to make our products great. People are what make organizations tick, and my job is to empower them all.
Totally exaggerated - no one is that smooth and good at firing people. It may not seem like the person doing the firing has any feelings, but they do. They are usually scared out of their mind, afraid to screw it up, because they don't do it all the time. Often they genuinely care about the person, as they have worked together a while, and are super bummed. And they don't want to get the stink eye when they run into them at the local coffee shop.
Share Answer: 
Ah, so many to choose from... and yet it always comes by to my dating life. It was quite embarrassing to tell my boss that the guy she needed me to fire was the same person I had broken up with two weeks before. And that was far more pleasant than the conversation with the guy. It went something along the lines of, "Remember how I told you it wasn't you, it was me? Well, I wasn't being completely honest. It really is you. And now (the company) is breaking up with you too."
Share Answer: 
Ah, say it with me: "Nothing Is Easy". You are correct - all of us have certain skills and are capable of learning and developing in these key areas. There are some things we will never be good at, no matter how hard we try. The challenge in this situation is whether or not the employee agrees that they suck at their job, and are likely not to improve. If so, you typically can have honest conversations about how to support the employee moving to a position that is better suited for their skill set - either with the company or elsewhere. (I don't recommend using the words "you suck" in the conversation, as it generally doesn't engender goodwill.) If the employee doesn't see the light, and disagrees with your opinion on their abilities, you can simply fire them - but you probably want to do a risk assessment before taking that step as there are legal and business factors to consider. If this a small industry, and will you likely need to work with this person down the road in a different capacity, you will probably want to protect the relationship. The person will want to feel they were treated fairly and given the opportunity to address the issue. The legal risk is that the employee could claim that performance was a 'pretext' reason for the termination and that, instead, the real reason for firing them was illegal (for gender, age, race, etc.) Your best defense against this type of claim is to show the person was treated fairly, and given the opportunity to address the issue. (See a theme?)
Share Answer: 
It is a highly overused term. Without knowing all the details, I would guess that you are applying for roles that are not central to what an organization does. For example, as a tech company, I will always be hiring developers. But, that isn't true in other areas such as Marketing, Legal or Finance. Because these are considered 'support' functions, headcount is very closely managed in these areas. It may be possible that you are applying at organizations that are truly in a freeze - but in my experience this is quite rare. It usually happens in organizations that are super small, in severe financial distress or a business in which labor is the largest cost and managed down to the very minutes employees work (like a call center, for example.)
Share Answer: 
Dating Website Employee
What are the most common mistakes guys make on out their profiles?
Stand-Up Comedian
Did your career blow up after you performed on the Tonight Show / Conan?
Antiques Dealer
Do you think today's "stuff" will one day be collected as valuable antiques?
I'm sorry - that sounds like a terrible experience. It's adding insult to injury. I hope they gave you a decent severance package, at least. In general, when doing layoffs, you do need to be able to legally justify who you selected for layoff as opposed to who you didn't. This decision making process defines the factors taken into account when selecting who is impacted, and usually includes one or more of: skill set, location, time in job and / or performance. While this process needs to be defined, it doesn't need to be communicated to impacted individuals during the layoff process. I don't know if your performance truly was an issue, but it sounds as if they wanted to communicate that it was and it was how they make their decision. When you say "our practice", I am assuming you worked at a law firm. Being a bunch of lawyers, my guess is that they were trying to cover their rear ends by providing you a 'defensible reason' for choosing you to lay off. That's sort of crummy, especially when you consider if they offered you severance, it came with a release from claims. If you sign that, you can't come back and sue them - so no need to worry about providing a reason at the beginning of the process.
Share Answer: 
That one is easy - great upper management. If you have awesome middle management, but the people that run the show are a-holes, you have no hope for a great workplace. At least with crappy middle managers, you can always go to the top for support and inspiration. And hopefully some timely "your fired!" comments...
Share Answer: 
I am sorry you are having such a hard time. It is clear that you have worked hard to overcome your past, but are still facing some challenges. Fortunately, just a few months ago, there has been an update in this area that may be helpful to you as you move forward in your career. Recently, the EEOC issued guidelines that outline when employers can take into account the criminal history of a job applicant or employee. In the past, employers typically had a policy of not hiring individuals who had felony convictions, regardless of the details of that conviction. This no longer is permissible, and each situation must be considered individually. The EEOC cites the most important considerations as: (1) the nature and gravity of the offense (2) the time that has lapsed since the offense and (3) the nature of the job. To learn more, I recommend you check out the details at the EEOC's website at www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/arrest_conviction.cfm. The information is long, but it will help you understand how this new approach works and can give you some specific steps you can take to address the situation. Good luck! I wish you much success and continued achievement.
Share Answer: 
-OR-
Login with Facebook (max 20 characters - letters, numbers, and underscores only. Note that your username is private, and you have the option to choose an alias when asking questions or hosting a Q&A.)
(A valid e-mail address is required. Your e-mail will not be shared with anyone.)
(min 5 characters)
By checking this box, you acknowledge that you have read and agree to Jobstr.com’s Terms and Privacy Policy.
-OR-
Register with Facebook(Don't worry: you'll be able to choose an alias when asking questions or hosting a Q&A.)
Browse Jobs
Host a Q&A
Search
Submit Your Question
Host a Q&A
Last 7
