9 ms·

One thing that I had to learn the hard way years ago is that there's no equivalent to "doctor-patient privilege" for HR people. They can and will use what you

One thing that I had to learn the hard way years ago is that there's no equivalent to "doctor-patient privilege" for HR people. They can and will use what you say against you, and they will likely relay what you say to other people. It's admittedly pretty cynical, but at this point I treat HR meetings more like police interrogations, and keep my answer short, minimal, and utilitarian, knowing what I say can and will be used against me. It's not fair to the HR people, most of them are perfectly nice, but they're in a position that's often inherently antagonistic towards workers, since they're generally only called when you're in trouble.

JohnFen 3y ago
The cynicism is correct, though. HR represents the employer and the employer's interests, not the employee's.
- justinjlynn 3y ago
  Indeed, it's _you_ who are the human "resource" HR is managing.
- FireBeyond 3y ago
  Precisely. I had HR literally acknowledge that my manager had objectively done NONE of the things they pledged to do, and that I had done EACH of them... ... and that they were standing by the manager's decision. (I didn't expect any different, to be honest. I'm not that naive. But it was straight up acknowledged that the manager had been dishonest with both me, and HR, but because of their larger investment in him, that was the way they were going to go.)
  - tombert 3y ago
    I think by the time any complaint goes to HR the decisions have generally been made, or at least nearly so. HR is (I think) largely there to gather information they can use for disciplinary action and/or termination.
cmcconomy 3y ago
HR are absolutely cops
mytailorisrich 3y ago
HR is a function of the company and the people working in the HR department are agents of the company (as employees) Not sure why anyone would think that they are 'neutral' or trying to help employees against the interests of the company.
- tombert 3y ago
  They are generally very friendly, and they give an aura of "we're just here to help". I don't think people will fall for this more than once, but it's pretty easy for me to see why someone would think they're "on your side".
- anigbrowl 3y ago
  Because they act that way until a conflict of interest arises.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  It's right there in the name: "human resources". Employees are the resource, and HR exists to help maximize the benefit the company extracts from that resource.
- jahsome 3y ago
  Are you really not sure why anyone would think that way? Do you really believe every single person is (or should be) utterly cynical? In a lot of orgs, an HR rep is the first person a new hire will interact with and IME they're usually very helpful, and kind -- at that point. It's not hard to see why someone unfamiliar with corporate politics or structure would see HR favorably if that's their only experience. I think my point is, HR reps can be rather deceptive, and in some extreme cases, deliberately so. So I understand your point from a logical perspective, but thankfully, the reality is logic doesn't drive everyone. There's a certain portion of the population who isn't skeptical of kindness, and accepts it at face value. Chalk it up to naivety or youthful/willful ignorance, if you must. Whatever the reason there are folks who choose to see the good in people, and not constantly question their motives. As a reformed cynic, I'd really recommend giving it a try. I personally find it less depressing way to walk though the world.
mattbrewsbytes 3y ago
HR works closely with and is sometimes positioned organizationally with the Legal department for obvious reasons. Their main purpose is to protect the company (first) and employees (via laws they have to follow). Laws that protect employees are there not because companies were thinking of employees and they advocated for them. HR people can be some of the chattiest, rumor spreading types, so expect whatever you tell one of them, all of them will know and maybe some of their office buddies. They also have some hilarious stories.
madeofpalk 3y ago
Do people often have many interactions with HR? Or am I a beneficiary of whatever privilege that has not required much mediation through HR?
- thih9 3y ago
  Depending on company culture HR workflows can exist alongside regular company workflows, especially for topics related to internal recruitment, yearly reviews, performance reviews, retrospectives, new hires, team building, the possibilities are endless.
  - madeofpalk 3y ago
    Right - 90% of my interactions with 'HR' are for interview scheduling. Other 10% are with trouble using benefits. I'm completely aware of "HR is not your friend", but I've never had a meeting with HR, nor a situation where someone pretty cynical would treat it as a police interrogation.
- tombert 3y ago
  Only a few times, really only when I've gotten into some kind of trouble. Though I got laid off three times in the last two years, so I have had a lot more experience with HR than I have really wanted.
- scruple 3y ago
  I haven't even spoken to an HR rep at my current employer. 15 months in. I love this place!
thih9 3y ago
Absolutely. HR employees are after all just like regular employees. They are getting paid to act according to the requirements of the employer. Meaning that they are incentivized to act in the best interest of the company and not of their coworkers.
Brian_K_White 3y ago
One place I left, medium global multinational, HR person who I thought their job was to just to be my point of contact for wrapping up & coordinating paperwork stuff like my retirement acct, return shipping company property, etc, spent a couple weeks of emails & phone calls trying both directly and indirectly to get me to say things that could possibly be used against me. It was super transparent so it was easy to just not play along without being uncivil, and only uncooperative to the unspoken parts. So it was pointless and not stressful, but the way they kept trying became kind of interesting to just observe. Was it not obvious to them that it was obvious to me? You have to wonder what that person's job is actually like. Do they actually care if this huge multinational, which is surely treating them even worse than me, saves a few $k on a rando employee they have no personal interaction with? Are their own metrics impacted by the details of the people they process? Or is it more like general unspoken manager pressure where it's a manager who is incentivised by their overall numbers and they in turn just get those numbers out of their staff. I can imagine in many cases there may be nothing like any overt instruction like "try to get them to incriminate themselves", just formality forms with questions that actually sound constructive like "What could we do better?", etc. But this was more than that. This person had a goal. I can understand the company having that goal, but I can't understand the person having that goal.
- tombert 3y ago
  Out of curiosity, what did they say to try and coerce you into admitting something. I want to look out for red flags in the future.
  - JTyQZSnP3cQGa8B 3y ago
    Not OP but I had an experience like this recently. A toxic manager hated me and other employees, and wanted to fire me in the quickest way possible. He started to give me tasks that were clearly illegal, like sending the passwords of the company by email to random people (contractors included which made it more obvious). I refused for two weeks while providing alternative solutions but this sociopath still was not happy. HR got involved somehow, but instead of siding with me, they told me in the nicest way that I would be a good employee if I obeyed and sent private data by email. It was obvious this time that they were building a case against me, because I knew what they were capable of. But younger me would have happily complied and break the law because, after all, HR is good for the employees and are not talking to the managers behind your back, right? So, the red flag is "when HR is nice to you." Never forget that they also obey the orders of the managers. Also they will happily forge emails to fire you. I’ve seen that more than once, and they’ll pretend it never happened. That’s why you must keep traces of email conversations if you feel something is wrong.
WheelsAtLarge 3y ago
"It's admittedly pretty cynical," Nope, it's not cynical. Everyone needs to know that HR is there to protect and benefit the company, not the individual. There is a truckload of rules and laws that a company needs to comply with in order to not get fined or sued. Additionally, the company must coordinate the human capital which is why the department exists. Helping the employee is a side effect. It's not its primary role. Always keep in mind that you are not paying the HR employee's salary. It's the company. Therefore you are not the department's primary client.
drewcoo 3y ago
> no equivalent to "doctor-patient privilege" for HR people. They work more like cops. Or maybe vampires. Never tell them anything that could be used against you. Or let them in your house.
goodpoint 3y ago
> no equivalent to "doctor-patient privilege" for HR people It's much, much worse. There's "lawyer-client" relationship between HR and the company. You are NOT the client. You are the adverse party. > pretty cynical They are being cynical, not you.

JohnFen 3y ago

The cynicism is correct, though. HR represents the employer and the employer's interests, not the employee's.

justinjlynn 3y ago
Indeed, it's _you_ who are the human "resource" HR is managing.
FireBeyond 3y ago
Precisely. I had HR literally acknowledge that my manager had objectively done NONE of the things they pledged to do, and that I had done EACH of them... ... and that they were standing by the manager's decision. (I didn't expect any different, to be honest. I'm not that naive. But it was straight up acknowledged that the manager had been dishonest with both me, and HR, but because of their larger investment in him, that was the way they were going to go.)
- tombert 3y ago
  I think by the time any complaint goes to HR the decisions have generally been made, or at least nearly so. HR is (I think) largely there to gather information they can use for disciplinary action and/or termination.

cmcconomy 3y ago

HR are absolutely cops

mytailorisrich 3y ago

HR is a function of the company and the people working in the HR department are agents of the company (as employees) Not sure why anyone would think that they are 'neutral' or trying to help employees against the interests of the company.

tombert 3y ago
They are generally very friendly, and they give an aura of "we're just here to help". I don't think people will fall for this more than once, but it's pretty easy for me to see why someone would think they're "on your side".
anigbrowl 3y ago
Because they act that way until a conflict of interest arises.
JohnFen 3y ago
It's right there in the name: "human resources". Employees are the resource, and HR exists to help maximize the benefit the company extracts from that resource.
jahsome 3y ago
Are you really not sure why anyone would think that way? Do you really believe every single person is (or should be) utterly cynical? In a lot of orgs, an HR rep is the first person a new hire will interact with and IME they're usually very helpful, and kind -- at that point. It's not hard to see why someone unfamiliar with corporate politics or structure would see HR favorably if that's their only experience. I think my point is, HR reps can be rather deceptive, and in some extreme cases, deliberately so. So I understand your point from a logical perspective, but thankfully, the reality is logic doesn't drive everyone. There's a certain portion of the population who isn't skeptical of kindness, and accepts it at face value. Chalk it up to naivety or youthful/willful ignorance, if you must. Whatever the reason there are folks who choose to see the good in people, and not constantly question their motives. As a reformed cynic, I'd really recommend giving it a try. I personally find it less depressing way to walk though the world.

mattbrewsbytes 3y ago

HR works closely with and is sometimes positioned organizationally with the Legal department for obvious reasons. Their main purpose is to protect the company (first) and employees (via laws they have to follow). Laws that protect employees are there not because companies were thinking of employees and they advocated for them. HR people can be some of the chattiest, rumor spreading types, so expect whatever you tell one of them, all of them will know and maybe some of their office buddies. They also have some hilarious stories.

madeofpalk 3y ago

Do people often have many interactions with HR? Or am I a beneficiary of whatever privilege that has not required much mediation through HR?

thih9 3y ago
Depending on company culture HR workflows can exist alongside regular company workflows, especially for topics related to internal recruitment, yearly reviews, performance reviews, retrospectives, new hires, team building, the possibilities are endless.
- madeofpalk 3y ago
  Right - 90% of my interactions with 'HR' are for interview scheduling. Other 10% are with trouble using benefits. I'm completely aware of "HR is not your friend", but I've never had a meeting with HR, nor a situation where someone pretty cynical would treat it as a police interrogation.
tombert 3y ago
Only a few times, really only when I've gotten into some kind of trouble. Though I got laid off three times in the last two years, so I have had a lot more experience with HR than I have really wanted.
scruple 3y ago
I haven't even spoken to an HR rep at my current employer. 15 months in. I love this place!

thih9 3y ago

Absolutely. HR employees are after all just like regular employees. They are getting paid to act according to the requirements of the employer. Meaning that they are incentivized to act in the best interest of the company and not of their coworkers.

Brian_K_White 3y ago

One place I left, medium global multinational, HR person who I thought their job was to just to be my point of contact for wrapping up & coordinating paperwork stuff like my retirement acct, return shipping company property, etc, spent a couple weeks of emails & phone calls trying both directly and indirectly to get me to say things that could possibly be used against me. It was super transparent so it was easy to just not play along without being uncivil, and only uncooperative to the unspoken parts. So it was pointless and not stressful, but the way they kept trying became kind of interesting to just observe. Was it not obvious to them that it was obvious to me? You have to wonder what that person's job is actually like. Do they actually care if this huge multinational, which is surely treating them even worse than me, saves a few $k on a rando employee they have no personal interaction with? Are their own metrics impacted by the details of the people they process? Or is it more like general unspoken manager pressure where it's a manager who is incentivised by their overall numbers and they in turn just get those numbers out of their staff. I can imagine in many cases there may be nothing like any overt instruction like "try to get them to incriminate themselves", just formality forms with questions that actually sound constructive like "What could we do better?", etc. But this was more than that. This person had a goal. I can understand the company having that goal, but I can't understand the person having that goal.

tombert 3y ago
Out of curiosity, what did they say to try and coerce you into admitting something. I want to look out for red flags in the future.
- JTyQZSnP3cQGa8B 3y ago
  Not OP but I had an experience like this recently. A toxic manager hated me and other employees, and wanted to fire me in the quickest way possible. He started to give me tasks that were clearly illegal, like sending the passwords of the company by email to random people (contractors included which made it more obvious). I refused for two weeks while providing alternative solutions but this sociopath still was not happy. HR got involved somehow, but instead of siding with me, they told me in the nicest way that I would be a good employee if I obeyed and sent private data by email. It was obvious this time that they were building a case against me, because I knew what they were capable of. But younger me would have happily complied and break the law because, after all, HR is good for the employees and are not talking to the managers behind your back, right? So, the red flag is "when HR is nice to you." Never forget that they also obey the orders of the managers. Also they will happily forge emails to fire you. I’ve seen that more than once, and they’ll pretend it never happened. That’s why you must keep traces of email conversations if you feel something is wrong.

WheelsAtLarge 3y ago

"It's admittedly pretty cynical," Nope, it's not cynical. Everyone needs to know that HR is there to protect and benefit the company, not the individual. There is a truckload of rules and laws that a company needs to comply with in order to not get fined or sued. Additionally, the company must coordinate the human capital which is why the department exists. Helping the employee is a side effect. It's not its primary role. Always keep in mind that you are not paying the HR employee's salary. It's the company. Therefore you are not the department's primary client.

drewcoo 3y ago

> no equivalent to "doctor-patient privilege" for HR people. They work more like cops. Or maybe vampires. Never tell them anything that could be used against you. Or let them in your house.

goodpoint 3y ago

> no equivalent to "doctor-patient privilege" for HR people It's much, much worse. There's "lawyer-client" relationship between HR and the company. You are NOT the client. You are the adverse party. > pretty cynical They are being cynical, not you.