4 ms·
At this size u need HR just to deal with holiday requests and sick leave.
by keenreed 6y ago
At this size u need HR just to deal with holiday requests and sick leave.
- FalconSensei 6y agoOr call it by a different name, but doing the exact same functions
- jandrese 6y agoOr just delegate down to the employee's direct supervisor. You need HR when someone has a harassment claim against a coworker, or their boss. Some third party not in their chain.
- nikanj 6y agoHaving 150 people do HR tasks means you have 150 different versions of vacation policies. In large companies that works, because there's an actual HR department that writes the ironclad rules that the direct supervisors follow. Not sure how it works in a wild-west ad-hoc environment like this one.
- mamon 6y agoIsn't that a good thing? Each team has its own vacation policy that suits them, instead of some rules imposed on them by HR department.
- geofft 6y agoAt that point, why have 1,200 people in a single company? Why not have each team hire each other team as contractors? (This isn't sarcasm, I actually do vaguely suspect the world would be a better place if we did this.)
- nikanj 6y agoIt's like microservices: the company, with all the downsides that come from higher transaction latencies between component parts. Economics of scale would also be lost, if you had to do all the book keeping, IRS reporting, etc etc for 120 companies of 10, instead of one company of 1200.
- geofft 6y agoWell, you could outsource those, right? Like isn't this basically the point of services like Stripe Atlas or Pilot - that it should be easier to run a company of 10, with almost all of those 10 people working on the actual product? In fact, outsourcing HR in particular is a well-established field - it's what companies like ADP do. Just like there's a happy ground between one massive monolith and multiple microservices per engineer, I think there's a happy ground between a 1200-person company and a bunch of sole proprietorships. It may not be 10; it might be 50. There are a huge number of <50-person companies in the world and they seem to be fine. In many cases, groups of these companies can execute faster than a 1200-person company can, because there's less internal hierarchy involved. (In much the same way that avoiding microservices doesn't mean you have no problems of interoperability, it just means they look different.)
- Donald 6y agoIt's also a good way to get slapped with lawsuits from decisions made by people who don't understand FMLA leave.
- valuearb 6y agoLegal can vet guidelines for the company, you don’t need a whole HR department to implant them, or anything.
- ugh123 6y agoHaving worked and managed in several companies of this size I have no idea why you would need an HR dept to manage that. Easily the job of manager owned tool, secured spreadsheet, or some simple vendor supplied thing. Easily a self serviced thing.
- nkrisc 6y agoNot if you let managers actually "manage" their team and capacity. You don't need to manage sick leave if you don't have sick leave and just let people take time off when they're sick and treat them like, you know, adults. I'm sure a manager is also better equipped to know when someone is taking advantage, as opposed to some HR person who's never even seen the employee.
- keenreed 6y agoThanks but no. Managers have their favorites. As young single male I am always expected to pick up the slack for lazy colleagues without compensation. I will take my chances with HR.
- valuearb 6y agoThat’s crazy that you think that HR would do anything other than back up your biased manager to the hilt.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- nkrisc 6y agoThere's shitty managers and there's shitty HR. The existence of one doesn't preclude the existence of the other. I'd tell you to stand up for yourself if that's happening to you, but it won't matter because HR isn't on your side anyway.
- jnwatson 6y agoWe have an app for that.