The HR Junkyard » In the Junkyard

Where I Rant about Immigration Laws…

junkyardHR — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 19:09:40 +0000

Worker verification is popular – in Arizona. A new poll conducted by the Arizona Republic newspaper in Phoenix this month “asked 616 state residents whether employers should be required to prove that all their workers are U.S. citizens or have valid work visas. Sixty-six percent said they would support a state law to that effect, and 58 percent gave their highest endorsement to the idea.”

From tlnt.com on the weekly update.

Cartoon by Paul Szep at truthdig.com

There’s been much conversation this week in the news and elsewhere about the Arizona Immigrant Law that was sliced and diced by a federal judge. Arizona decided that they needed their own way to deal with immigration, but I’m guessing that perhaps a hard look at state-wide employment practice might be in order.

66% of the residents surveyed support a state law requiring employers to prove that all workers are valid to work in the US. I’m not sure exactly where my befuddlement lies, with the newspaper that asked this question, or the obvious ignorance of the respondents.

There’s this little federal law that has been on the books since 1952 called the Immigration and Nationality Act which codifies who is and is not eligible to work in the US. Then the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) was enacted which required all US businesses to complete the I-9 form, verifying identity and work authorization for every employee within three days of employment. In many states, there’s also new hire laws, which require employers to submit information to state agencies on all newly hired employees. In other words, any person residing in the US who has held a job since 1986 has been required to fill out this form and present proof of citizenship and/or work authorization.

1986, people… that was one year after I had my first real job. I’ve been completing these forms for my own employment for 25 years. This cannot be a new concept for 66% of the respondents in this Phoenix, AZ survey.

We don’t need state laws to “prove citizenship” – we’ve been doing it for years. And the form and procedure are really not that complicated. In all the years I’ve practiced Human Resources, I’ll admit I’ve come across enough undocumented workers that I can pretty much tell you when they walk in the door whether they will be authorized to work, and I’ve been on the receiving end of huge pressure to hire someone I know cannot produce the proper documentation. But as HR professionals, those are the tough conversations we have to have with our bosses or the hiring managers. It might be a conversation that you don’t want to have, but then I have to wonder if you’ve wrapped your brain around the consequences of NOT having it.

Sometimes I wonder which part of “its the law” companies just don’t seem to get. In fact, there’s been at least one case I’m aware of where the HR professional in question was sentenced to jail time for signing I-9’s completed with false documentation. Read more here. I also found this, and while its not all about human resources professionals getting into hot water, you have to wonder how they could not know what was happening.

I think there are ways to solve this immigration problem we have, but that is not the point of this post. So what is your point, you may ask?

Primarily, that I see too much media asking silly questions like the one from the Arizona Republic, to either further a political agenda, or simply rile the masses. Ask the real questions, educate your readers, don’t simply play to the headlines.

Secondly, that employers who are running afoul of the law because they “need” workers, need to look at what they are doing to be a part of the problem, and not part of the solution. Are these CEO’s really waking up in the morning saying “I risk prison time if my employees aren’t legal, but its the HR Manager’s job to ensure that, right?” I don’t think they are, but some of them may be living under the “ignorance is bliss” banner.

We can go to jail for signing a false document. Have you read the bottom of the I-9? I don’t know about you, but I’m not going to jail for my employer. A paycheck isn’t worth that experience. We have to be willing to stand up for things, particularly when “its the law” is a dead on reason.

Have you encountered this issue in a company? How have you handled it?

Privacy: Where is the Line in the Sand?

junkyardHR — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:48:08 +0000

Courtesy of http://riskman.typepad.com/peerflow/privacy/

There is a case to be heard by the Supreme Court involving a police officer and his use of a pager for personal messages. The pager was issued to him by his employer, a police department. This officer was terminated for sending explicit texts on the pager, but the case isn’t about the explicity of the texts, its about a reasonable expectation of privacy, because he was only found out when the texts went over the allowed limit. See the legal details here.

The true legal issue will rest on the idea that as work and personal time blurs, so blurs the idea that the company controls all data that is sent or received from its equipment – if you carry a blackberry, you may be like me, and receive email from the boss at 11pm on a Saturday night, needing an answer, or requiring some of your time. As companies encroach on their employees personal time, it makes sense that some of those personal communications will encroach on the company equipment.

I actually carry two phones in order to keep my personal and business life as separate as possible, but I know that I am an exception to this rule. While the prevailing law has maintained that companies do in fact own the data, more recent legal opinions are shifting the wind toward some level of privacy for employees.

Another recent case is a lawsuit filed by parents of a Pennsylvania student where the School District supplied laptops and then activated the websam on the laptop remotely – for monitoring purposes. Webcam screenshots were being taken of students, under the age of 18, in whatever location the laptop happens to be. (bedrooms, living quarters, other people’s houses?) The student at the heart of the lawsuit was accused of “improper behavior in his home” (The specific behavior hasn’t been made public) at which time his parents were made aware that the webcam had remote functionality. See more details here and here.

If I discovered my home was being monitored by the school district simply because the school had issued my child (or another child, not my own) a computer, I think I’d be filing a lawsuit as well. My company issued me a laptop for use in the course of my work – I’m a consenting adult – what right would they have to monitor my behavior via webcam while not on company premises?

Technology is presenting privacy challenges. Just because we have the ability to do something, doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do. Fire an employee for sending sexually explicit texts, fine. But fire him for sending any sort of personal text? Not so much. Track locations of laptops with full disclosure to students, parents or employees, and prior notification before actual tracking takes place, sure. Monitor an individual through remote access of webcams with no notification that its even possible that this could happen, or in the privacy of one’s own home? That borders on voyeuristic (I’m being generous here) and I’ll wager will be upheld as a 4th amendment violation, not to mention an Electronic Communications Privacy Act violation.

Lawsuits like these are going to have far reaching implications on work, work/life balance, and how intrusive employers and government entities have the right to be in our lives. Its time for the tide to turn on technology law to protect our privacy. My employer, my child’s school district and the government do not own my life. And those who give up essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither. (to paraphrase Benjamin Franklin)

What say you? Does the employer have the right to monitor all communications, and terminate for personal use? What if that personal use happens at 10pm on a Thursday night, when you aren’t usually working, but you just happen to be finishing that big project due next week? Should webcams on laptops be able to be remotely accessed for monitoring purposes? Where should we draw the line?

The Key to the Gate

junkyardHR — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 14:52:07 +0000

The HR Manager at the company you just applied for isn’t the gatekeeper. That manager is your friend. Not in a “lets get coffee” sort of way, but rather a “if you are the right candidate, this person will kill themselves to get you hired”sort of way.

Why?
Because I don’t want to do this all over again.

Its taken a lot of time to make everything happen when I am looking for great talent, time I can’t get back, so why would I want to interview or hire the wrong person, and have to start over?

If you’ve submitted your resume, wait 2 weeks. If you haven’t heard from me, send one follow-up email, or make one phone call. I’ll tell you what’s going on, and where in the process your resume is sitting. I’ll give you the straightest skinny I have. I won’t lie about this.

Why?
Because there are 100 reasons I might not have called you in the first place. And if you turn out to be the right candidate, I’m not starting our business relationship off with a lie. And because its bad for business to have a customer hate me. (Logically, if you would work for me, you could potentially be our customer)

But.
If I tell you you are not in the running for the position. Believe me.
Again, I have no reason to lie to you.
Calling every day/week won’t help. It doesn’t make you “assertive”, it makes you seem desperate. And I ask myself “Why is this person hanging their career on my one job opening?”

Companies hire great candidates every day. If your resume seems lost in an abyss, or if the managers are unresponsive, you want to look at the company with a critical eye. Those processes in the “before hire” are the same ones you’ll work with in the “after hire”.

Great matches are tough to make, and usually there are many stakeholders involved. HR is the manager of that process. We aren’t someone to “get around”. Hiring you makes my job easier, and if you are the rockstar we’re looking for, I’m going to do everything I can to get you in the door. You can bank on it.

Avatar and HR Pt 3

junkyardHR — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 22:16:53 +0000

Career Ending Choices

Sometimes even when you love your job, you have to make a decision between doing what you have been asked to do, and doing the right thing.

Going back to the Avatar movie, there one character who is a fighter pilot, she’s a rock hard chick who is VERY good at what she does. Most people, at some point in their lives, have encountered a moment where you do/say/agree with things because you will be perceived as weak for not doing so. And at that moment, or perhaps later, you regret the decision to cave to the pressure.

This pilot character, after participating in a brutal bombing of the native inhabitants of the planet, changes her mind about which side of this war she’s on. She knows this military maneuver wasn’t the right thing to do. She abandons the corporate militia to assist the Na’vi in their battle. She makes a career ending decision because it is exactly the right thing to do.

Over the years I’ve worked in environments where bullying and peer pressure were not uncommon leadership strategies. One of the things I learned along the way is that it is never right to go along with something your gut tells you is wrong. If a management decision requires those types of tactics to get everyone “on the same page” – something is fishy.

It might end a job, or even a career – but I’d much rather be able to look myself in the mirror in the morning, than hide behind the excuse that someone “made me” violate my principles, because frankly, no one can make me do anything of the sort.

Its a choice.
So toss the excuse in the junkyard.
And just do the right thing.

Avatar and HR: Pt 2

junkyardHR — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 01:06:49 +0000

Looking beyond the Resume

Jake Sully: Former Marine, twin brother to a scientist trained in the Na’vi language, and hired to go to Pandora for the Avatar mission. The corporation has grown an avatar specifically for the brother, at the cost of millions of dollars and months of time.

Jake Sully has buried his brother, and becomes his replacement on the mission. Why?

Because they share the same DNA, and he’ll “fit” in the Avatar. And he’s a trained Marine, so at least there’s that bonus. Another warrior. With no training, no real knowledge of what he’s about to do… he heads to Pandora.

Oh, did I mention Jake is a disabled Marine, not the sharpest tool in the shed, in a wheelchair, with absolutely no use of his legs and carrying a rather heavy chip on his shoulder? He’s now least likely to succeed on a hostile alien planet in a highly scientific environment, right?

Jake may have been picked for this mission solely because he shared his brother’s DNA, and because the corporation really didn’t want to grow another Avatar on short notice, but he becomes an integral part of the program. He is the guiding force behind the plot, because once he reaches Pandora, his superiors are able to look past his resume. Some to exploit, but others because they recognized skills. He becomes a leader.

In HR, as talent managers, we’ve all had rough resumes cross our desks, or met someone, immediately sized them up, and pigeonholed them into a job because this is what their background was… and we’ve all had to change our minds, because people are more than their resumes, more than our initial assumptions.

In my career I’ve met several people like this, People whom I initially put in a box because I’d seen their file, because I listened to their supervisors, or because somehow there’d been a bad first impression. Once I got to know these people, once I saw their talents, and a few of them, wow, did they have some talent, I had to change my mind, I had to look beyond the resume.

Skill, expertise, leadership, motivation. All of these traits can be masked by communication problems, leadership failures, or a lack of proper job fit. And all of them can be resolved if we, as astute HR practitioners, look at employees or candidates for who they are, if we have honest conversations with them, and their leaders, and at least for me, if I listen to my gut.

Do you have examples of people for whom you looked past the resume?
Or maybe a failure for the Junkyard?

Avatar and HR Pt 1

junkyardHR — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 04:14:33 +0000

I hunkered down to watch Avatar 3D over the holidays, expecting a thoroughly visually entertaining and tree hugging feel good movie. I left with thoughts of leadership failures, looking beyond the resume, and making life changing career choices because its simply the right thing to do. If you haven’t seen this movie, and intend to, I may ruin it for you, you’ve been warned.

Leadership

The hard core ass-kicking Marine security leader who takes no prisoners, no bullshit, and no losses (as Marines are wont to do) has one thing in mind.

Win.
At all costs.

He takes every step a military leader should take. He motivates his troops with WIIFM (whats in it for me) , with patriotism (or perhaps Corporate Loyalty) and with sense of duty. He creates a common enemy to drive his hard charging forces to do the things they are trained to do, without question.

Which, honestly, is the point, if you have a war to win.

Except this isn’t a war. This is economic gain. This is “we came to your home to dispossess it of something we need, and have no intention of leaving until we get it, even if that means we have to kill you.”

This doesn’t sound familiar at all, right?

The leadership failure comes from the guy at the top, the man who has the authority and responsibility to not let aforementioned hard core ass-kicking Marine loose, until he’s exhausted all other options, and then, only maybe.

This particular leader had no spine. He lets the Military run roughshod, makes uninformed decisions, and acts rashly, while his “top notch team of scientists, advisers and engineers” which he is paying a small fortune to, being that they live on a planet in another galaxy that doesn’t even have AIR that’s breathable, scream at him to stop and think. He takes the expedient way out. (see previously mentioned lack of spine) And in no way, actually thinks.

So what’s leadership to do?

Can we start with “lead”?

Leadership is about making the decisions and having the conversations that might ruin your career. And if what you are about to do is in an argument with your gut, then DON’T DO IT.

Leadership is saying this is a BAD decision. And standing your ground. because, inevitably, you will be caught, maybe not this time, but eventually.

We all know what the right thing to do is, the tough part is doing it.
The Corporate Spineless Administrator knew it, and did nothing.
It ends badly for him.

If we all started calling leaders on their stupidity, they might, maybe, possibly, stop being stupid, and start doing the right thing.
But we certainly won’t know until we try.

Stay tuned for parts 2 and 3.
Because I’m longwinded on this one apparently.

Can Common Sense Kill the Buzzword?

junkyardHR — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:35:42 +0000

“Synergistic Implementation Abilities”

This was one of the many phrases I came across recently while dissecting job descriptions, and after the fifth or sixth time I found a similarly vague and buzzword laden line item, the only thing I could think was “someone has too much time on their hands”.

The individual who sits around combining phrases to make the job seem more complicated than it actually is has done no one a favor, including the Human Resources and Recruiting folks that have to fill those positions. Give me real skill sets. I speak engineering, programming, retail management, training, OD and all facets of human resources and I couldn’t translate this one into anything reasonable.

So I suppose that meant they should be looking for someone who speaks “buzzword” as their second language.

Let’s drill down:

Synergism: the interaction of elements that when combined produce a total effect that is greater than the sum of the individual elements, contributions, etc. (synergistic: pertaining to, characteristic of, or resembling synergism) – there are also medical related and theological definitions, which have no bearing on the industry or position in question.

So we want candidates who possess the ability to implement programs where the total outcome is greater than the sum of its parts. What we have here is a buzzword to cloak a cliché.

No kidding.

Instead of recycling the words from the medical, theological or legal industries to support the needs of some business professionals to sound more intelligent, lets recycle the mindset that we need fifty cent words to communicate. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t intend to bifurcate the conversation, nor is it my goal to be disingenuous in my critique of this confounding obfuscation of organizational development. (Hattip to Laurie, I couldn’t resist)

Perhaps with unlimited space in our website job listings, we’ve gotten “wordy”.

However, that line item simply had no business in the skill set. It didn’t mean anything. Someone needed a third for their list.

Common Sense can kill the buzzword. It doesn’t need to be fancy, it needs to be real.

Share your examples of nightmare wording, or buzzwords you‘d like to see tossed in the bin.