6 ms·
"In essence, the HR department blackmailed me that if I make noise, I’d be fired. I was distraught by the HR department’s response especially considering that m
by joezydeco 10y ago
"In essence, the HR department blackmailed me that if I make noise, I’d be fired. I was distraught by the HR department’s response especially considering that most of the HR folks I dealt with were women."
Say it over and over, say it loud, and say it to every single person entering the US workforce from day one:
H/R ACTS AND WILL ALWAYS ACT IN THE COMPANY'S BEST INTERESTS. NOT YOURS.
Amy's situation was grave, and kudos to her for getting out. But everyone should read these stories and burn this line into their heads permanently.
- neom 10y agoBusiness != Company, company (made up of orgs) is a component of a business. If someone in my HR group does not act in the best interests of the business AND the company (and usually putting the company before the business is the right thing to do) they would lose their job quite quickly. My obligation as a CEO is to my shareholders, and my shareholders know that putting my people in front of returns will always result in better returns. It's pretty clear cut, you're nothing without your people, and that's that.
- MaxfordAndSons 10y agoThe genius of labeling it "human resources" just struck me. As an employee (and human) it seems reasonable to interpret it as "resources for humans" and thus assume it would be there to help. But its true meaning, to execs/stakeholders/corporate persons, is "[the department which manages the] human resources".
- jacobolus 10y agoThis is not really an obscure secret. Wikipedia: “Human resources are the people who make up the workforce of an organization, business sector, or economy. [...] A human-resources department (HR department) of an organization performs human resource management, overseeing various aspects of employment, such as compliance with labour law and employment standards, administration of employee benefits, and some aspects of recruitment and dismissal.”
- MaxfordAndSons 10y agoI get that, I wasn't saying it was actually a secret, just a conveniently vague conventional name.
- abecedarius 10y agoThere's an sf novel featuring a futuristic form of slavery, with a character who's introduced as a Director of Human Resources: only much later do you find out what that means. Subtly done. (Your first meaning never occurred to me.)
- cyan_atrus 10y agowhat's the novel?
- jff 10y agoA Deepness In The Sky by Vernor Vinge
- Arizhel 10y ago>As an employee (and human) it seems reasonable to interpret it as "resources for humans" and thus assume it would be there to help. Where'd you ever get that crazy idea? >But its true meaning, to execs/stakeholders/corporate persons, is "[the department which manages the] human resources". Not exactly. The true meaning is "the department which works to exploit the human resources as much as possible".
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- nappy-doo 10y ago> H/R ACTS AND WILL ALWAYS ACT IN THE COMPANY'S BEST INTERESTS. NOT YOURS. You're right, and here's the thing. It seems both women who've come forward would have open-and-shut cases against Uber for multi-millions in damages. It's surprising to me that neither have pursued Uber in this regard. Similarly, it's surprising to me that Uber HR hasn't done the mental calculus to figure out that these women have a solid case, and just fix the problem. Or, most disturbingly, Uber HR DID do the mental calculus, determined neither woman would sue; and, therefore, made the correct choices as "best for the company." Either way, I'm taking Lyft.
- MaxfordAndSons 10y ago> It seems both women who've come forward would have open-and-shut cases against Uber for multi-millions in damages. Is it possible that their contracts are written in such a way as to preclude this? Which if so is gross and shouldn't be allowed by contract law IMO, but it certainly wouldn't surprise me.
- mpweiher 10y agoI severely doubt such a contract would hold up in court.
- bigiain 10y agoAre you certain enough of that you'd personally risk taking on Uber's legal team using your own time, money, and reputation?
- mpweiher 10y agoLet's just say that I was a little sad that my case (not Uber) was settled via the works-council dispute resolution mechanism... So: yes. I'd definitely talk to a lawyer in that case.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- wavefunction 10y agoIn response to your statement, I just have to say that Uber's HR _has not_ acted in the company's best interest and has actually worked in opposition to its best interest. Through inaction and malpractice they have increased the legal liability Uber faces and encouraged irreparable reputational damage for Uber.
- xenihn 10y ago>H/R ACTS AND WILL ALWAYS ACT IN THE COMPANY'S BEST INTERESTS. NOT YOURS. Except their actions here are not in the best interest of the company...why do people keep posting this in the context of discussing Uber? These are casebook examples of what HR should not do.
- pasbesoin 10y agoI'll add that a significant portion of people I've encountered who have careers in HR are not particularly empathic nor "people persons". That is, don't interact with them expecting to be "understood" as a person. You may not just get a "no, we can't do that". You may well also get an unmentioned strike against you, for even raising the point or concern. There are some good people in HR. Although, upon reflection, I realize that those I've met tended to have moved on or exited HR. Anyway, my point is, don't just expect "in the employer's interest", be also aware of and prepared for a lack of basic human connection.
- Gracana 10y agoIt's kind of like going to the police. They don't necessarily share your interests, and they have the power to destroy you. That some or good doesn't help much if you go to the one who isn't.
- naravara 10y ago>H/R ACTS AND WILL ALWAYS ACT IN THE COMPANY'S BEST INTERESTS. NOT YOURS. Point of order here. HR acts in management's best interests, not necessarily the company's. It's pretty clear that HR's actions here are not in the company's best interests given how much of a shitfest this has been for Uber. They gave cover for people who were not acting in Uber's best interests and, as a result, Uber lost all their goodwill, they're bleeding talent, and you'd have to be delusional to think toxic norms like this haven't been affecting their morale and productivity. Management's interests are separate from the best interests of the company. Shareholder interests are separate from the best interests of the company. A company is made up of employees, management, shareholders, AND clients all together. All of them are stakeholders and its best interests are the things that properly balance the needs of everyone to fulfill its mission or goal. It's neoliberal bullshit to claim that only management and shareholders matter, and the sooner we accept that the sooner we can make our corporate governance tack into a sane direction.
- fictioncircle 10y ago> Amy's situation was grave, and kudos to her for getting out. But everyone should read these stories and burn this line into their heads permanently. Yes but the company's best interest is to support Amy and fire Mike#2. The reason is that if there is credible evidence of this behavior, she has easy settlement on par with Mike's value to the company (unless that is measured in 8 figures which is unlikely since at the end of the day, if they paid him $500k...they could replace him for $500k).
- gnicholas 10y ago> H/R ACTS AND WILL ALWAYS ACT IN THE COMPANY'S BEST INTERESTS. NOT YOURS. Hopefully the recently-revealed experiences at Uber will be taken as a wake-up call by HR folks whose calculus tells them that the best option is to cover up problems. It should now be apparent that buried issues will eventually come to light, so the short-term gain of coverups won't be worth the long-term risk.
- spcelzrd 10y agoOne of the ways HR acts in the interest of the company, is to make sure managers aren't putting the company at risk by engaging in unethical or illegal behavior. HR isn't your friend, but if they enable harassment and discrimination, they are failing in their role of corporate governance and should be replaced. A competent CEO would take action here.
- abraae 10y agoOuch, those caps. Yes, normally, HR acts in the company's interests. But for many companies, its in their best interests to identify and fire creeps who work there and abuse women (or others generally). What HR will do for you depends on what type of company you work in. If you work in a company that cares about its culture, that values diversity and respects its employees, then HR is very likely to help you if you experience problems like these. If you work for Uber - well I guess that's what all the heat and light is about. Is Uber such a shithole that these kinds of behaviour are actually condoned by the CEO? Maybe we'll find out.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- cauterized 10y agoYes, HR acts in the company's best interests, not yours. However, if you ever want to be able to pursue legal claims against a company for actions such as permitting harassment, or firing you in retribution for it, you need to be able to document that you reported the problem to the appropriate people (i.e. HR). Going to HR is the right move for something like this. In any sane company, HR will take such a claim seriously because the potential legal downside if they don't is an unacceptable risk. In an insane company - aside from the fact that you can't measure the insanity level until you have in fact made such reports to HR and seen them dismissed - you still need to be able to show that you brought the problem to HR's attention and they did nothing about it.
- dang 10y agoPlease don't use uppercase for emphasis. This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.