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.
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.
I can't get no respect! Can you hear Rodney Dangerfield in your head? Overall, I haven't ever felt I was treated without respect or appreciation. But I do think that HR as a profession can sometimes carry a negative connotation for people, and I chalk it up to two factors: 1. HR used to be "Personnel" - the place where you filled out a lot of paperwork, were told the rules and received your safety training. You also were taken there when you broke some rules, and got in trouble. Fortunately, with the advent of computers, all that paperwork crap is gone. And none too soon, I have terrible handwriting. As for getting in trouble... well, if you are always in trouble, you likely won't like HR no matter what. 2. Like many professions where you spend at least part of your time solving other people's problems, drama-prone people can be drawn to HR. It's the "I need to feel needed to feel OK" orientation - and HR seems to draw a higher percentage of individuals than, say, software development. I interviewed someone not too long ago who said she wanted to be in HR because she loved spending a lot of time talking to people about their feelings. Oy. All it takes is for one or two run-ins with someone like that, and it's no wonder that people shy away from HR. All that said, there are many more kick ass people in HR who have earned the respect and admiration of the people they work with.
Lame - very lame. And, what's even worse, people typically don't act in a vacuum. If the host was awful to you, s/he likely was to other people as well.
Suing the company is where it gets a bit complicated. First, it depends on where you were that this happened. State laws tend to be a bit different when it comes to harassment law, with California being the strictest and easiest to pursue. It will also depend on the facts of the case. Was the host in a management position? How extreme was the incident? And, do you know for sure the company did nothing? Or, did they discipline the employee, but not make that known publicly - that is actually the typical response, due to privacy policies and laws.
If it were me, I'd actually look for resolution in a different manner - I would escalate the problem with the casino chain of management. I'd find the most senior executive I could, and reach out to them. Customer service organizations fear nothing more than an unhappy customer publicly denouncing services - and ruining their reputation in the process. It's like watching the news and the local customer protection reporter take on the case (in Seattle, we have "get Jesse") It's pretty amazing how quickly those situations seem to be resolved as soon as the story starts to go public. Much faster than a lawsuit, and cheaper than hiring a lawyer to be honest.
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...
Social Network Security Manager
Starbucks Barista
Call Center Representative
Yup - I knew, in my gut, when we interviewed two candidates that the first one would be a better fit for my team. But we had feedback from our client groups that they preferred candidate number two because he seemed to have more expertise in the area (he was a tech recruiter). In an effort to be a better service provider to them, we went with the person they preferred... and I wish we hadn't.
It was pretty clear within the first two weeks that the person we ended up hiring was NOT a good fit - poor communication skills, wasn't able to carry a full workload compared to his peers and all around a square peg in a round hole. The client groups weren't happy either - while they appreciated the one thing this person could do (find candidates online), it was frustrated trying to get any other deliverables from the person. And, in the end, we had to let him go after only a few weeks.
I should have listened to myself the first time!
The short answers is no, I don't take extra precautions. Every employee in that situation should be treated fairly, regardless of any personal characteristics. Truth is, with the passage of many federal, state and local laws, just about any characteristic can be considered a 'protected category' - race, religion, national origin, age, gender, religion, military status, sexual orientation. If almost everyone falls into one or more protected categories, then is anyone really special? Hence my assertion that all employees who are going to be fired need to be treated fairly, consistently and with respect. Plus, it's the right thing to do. If someone raises a concern that they are not being treated fairly because of one of the above categories, then the company has an obligation to look into the concerns. Either HR, Legal or an outside investigator should talk with the employee, understand the issues, gather any additional information relevant to the situation, and make a determination if there is any discrimination occurring and, if so, if it is related to the employee's performance. What is found during that process guides next steps. If there is discrimination, then there are bigger issues than a non-performing employee. If not, then the issue of discrimination has been resolved and the performance process can continue forward.
The short answer has to be money - HR people have a seriously low bill rate compared with lawyers. All joking aside, there are some HR people who have a background in employment law before getting into an HR role. But legal / compliance work is only a small part of what good HR people do. Hopefully they are spending more of their time on the fun stuff - creating innovative development programs, communicating with employees or designing compensation plans that achieve business results while rewarding people. Knowing the legal stuff is just the beginning and, if all the person knows, not enough to be a great HR professional.
-OR-
(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-
(Don't worry: you'll be able to choose an alias when asking questions or hosting a Q&A.)