Evil HR Lady?

There is a great HR blog titled Evil HR Lady where an anonomyous HR professional shares info about current HR trends and answers questions from readers about HR issues that they are facing in the workplace. The HR pro behind Evil HR Lady is not really evil, but she explains that is the perception of HR in many organizations. She is trying to break through the fluff and tell the readers like it is, for better or worse.

Although already taken, I think that I borrowed the title of "Evil HR Lady" last week. I may have even had a target on my back by the end of the week. One of my facebook friends asked how one of the nicest HR people that she knows could possibly earn such a title. Here are just a few of statement that I made last week to earn this title:

1. Employees own their annual performance objectives, not their manager. Employees have plenty of time during the objective year to argue, object, support, validate, or update performance objectives. I don't want to hear about how the objective was unfair after the fact - it's too late. We can only improve the situation going forward.
2. Annual evaluations should be fair and consistent. That means that most employees should be rated 3, not a 4. This means that there ARE a few 5s AND a few 2s in the organization. Do not tell me that a person cannot be rated a 5 because HR said so.
3. If you cannot separate personal relationships from business objectives, you should not be a manager.
4. If you are unclear about measurements, I can help you create them, but it's after the fact. I recommend that you start with the idea that everyone is a 3 (meets expectations) and then evaluate each person individually, even if you have 65 direct reports.
5. If your organization/department/manager did not meet it's objectives (or an objective) and your employees exceeded expectations, your goals stink.
6. If most of your employees are rated a 4, your expectations are too low. Challenge your top performers next year and watch your performance soar!
7. If all of your employees are 4, you had better have justification about why you give them different merit increases. I will ask you about each and every one.
8. If you choose not to follow the recommended process guidelines, I need to know why. I want to help you reward and retain top talent, but I will not go out on a limb if I don't understand the business justification. Help me help you.

None of these statements are new to HR professionals and it is uncomfortable for everyone involved to deliver these messages. However, pushing back is part of the job and I own it. You may call me an Evil HR Lady, but I call myself a HR Business Partner.

The top 10 reasons you know that you're working for a downsizing company

Reductions in force and reorganizations are no fun. A friend experiencing both sent this to me. He made it up himself and it's hilarious. Sometimes you just have to laugh. Happy Holidays!

10. No one wants your name in the office gift exchange.


9. There are not enough white elephant gifts to go around.

8. The holiday music is now a boom box from the welding department.

7. On the day of your termination you buy your boss a gift from the company P-card.

6. Christmas lunch is one free item from the vending machine.

5. The company gift card is good only after the first of the year.

4. The supervisors wore Friday the 13th masks for the Ugly Sweater contest.

3. The printer is always out of paper due to resume printing.

2. Employees are singing "all I want for Christmas is my severance package".

1. The mistletoe was moved to the HR department with the note " kiss your butt goodbye."

Here's to a great 2011!

Will you Terminate an Employee in December?

I had interesting discussions with two different friends recently about terminating employment in December. In different conversations, both friends stated that they needed to terminate an employee, one for performance reasons, one due to a position elimination, and were going to wait until January because they did not want to terminate an employee in December. I have also heard of no terminations in December as corporate policies. Really? I’m actually a pretty nice person, but I can’t imagine how or why a business would justify postponing a business decision because of a holiday. You would not handle a contract or other business transaction that way.


What happens when you put off a business decision like this? The company loses money by extending employment of an under performing employee. When an action like this is delayed, all of the managers involved are stressed and uncomfortable around the employee. (How is that evoking the holiday spirit?)

Ok, so even if you understand the negative implications of waiting 5 weeks to process a business transaction, your boss still wants to be Mr. Nice Guy during the holiday. What are the options in this situation?

1. Terminate or lay off the employee now. Just rip off the band aid and ask for forgiveness later.

2. Wait 5 long weeks and avoid the employee completely during said 5 long weeks. Hope that the no one complains about their work or that they do not give you a Christmas gift. Then you will be a huge schmuck.

3. My personal recommendation - Let the employee know his or her status now. Your position will be eliminated by the end of the year. You may remain working through the end of the year with these clear expectations, or you may leave earlier if you choose. If you remain through this date, you will be offered severance. If you do not remain through the date or do not meet the clear expectations given, you will not receive severance. I will be flexible with your time during December so that you can interview for a new position, but you need to meet these clear expectations. That’s pretty fair, even for Mr. Nice Guy.

I am leaving Linkedin Groups

Today it is official. I am unsubscribing to receive digests for two of my favorite and most important Linkedin groups, SHRM and ERE.net. I was an early adopter of Linkedin groups, enjoying the recruiting advantage when joining niche or local groups. I started and engaged in the discussions, posted articles and made significant new contacts and relationships through these groups. As the groups became larger and larger, folks marketing products and services have figured out how to dilute the content of the groups. Once a community of engaged participants, Linkedin groups have turned into now marketing channels to reach consumers.


SHRM and ERE.net (and LinkedCincinnati) were my favorite Linkedin groups for sharing, learning and asking. So what has caused me to leave SHRM and ERE.net groups? Let’s look at the content of the daily digest for SHRM on 11/18/10 an example.

SHRM (the official group, not the bootleg one) discussions:

Three active discussions – Workplace bulling has 724 comments (ok, that is absolutely overkill on any topic). I commented on this one back when there were less than 20 comments and left the conversation when I realized that the comments were negative, angry and endless. It’s time to move on people. The other two active discussions are real questions from practitioners, but you can’t find them in the mess of discussions. More about that follows…

Forty discussions. Sounds like an active group, right? We’ll let’s look at these 40 discussions –

• 8 articles were shared, mainly by people trying to market services to HR professionals

• 18 personal blogs were posted by the people who write them. Some even commented on their own blog posts in the group discussion area. Nice.

• 6 discussions or questions posted by HR practitioners

• 7 people directly marketing products and services to HR professionals. I’ve included job postings that are not related to HR in this category. Yes, we do notice when you ask a question about communication and you are the CEO of a communications consulting company. That’s why no one responds.

• 1 duplicate posting

I’ll say that there might be 10 postings that are actually interesting to the target audience – HR practitioners, but they are so difficult to find that I just scroll right on past to the job section.

Jobs section. There were 20 jobs listed on 11/18/10 digest:

• 9 jobs were related to HR

• 8 jobs were not related to HR, including a pastry chef. Really?

• 1 posting was a duplicate

• 2 postings were blog posting in the wrong section.

Let’s be honest, the free job posting service is what really retains group members in Linkedin groups. This is where you will find your passive job seeker, right? Not if they don’t look at the group discussions.

I have not bailed completely on Linkedin groups. I’m still a member, follower and active participant of 16 Linkedin groups, including local and smaller, targeted Linkedin groups such as alumni groups and my local SHRM chapter. Even though the guy who sells LED lights continues to spam the group with his marketing literature, I’m in for as long as the personal, relevant discussions continue. There is still tremendous value in Linkedin, but professionals marketing their services need to be more aware of their audience. Connecting personally will never compare to mass marketing - and Linkedin is the best tool for that!

Benefits and Politics

For many of us in HR, I sarcastically say that it's the most wonderful time... of the year - Open Enrollment. Our open enrollment meetings wrapped up this week. There are a few major changes to health care from the Healthcare Reform Act, including no lifetime limits and adult children can receive coverage up to age 26. There are always benefit policy changes and price adjustments to limit cost increases to the company and the employee. No surprise there.

What surprised me this year was the reaction to the information shared. The rumblings after the meetings were about "Obamacare", government and politics. Benefits and politics? Really? HR policies change every year, but this is the first time that I have noticed political rumblings after a benefits meeting. My opinion is that if you don't like what your government is doing, vote in November.

How did your open enrollment meetings go?

WARNING: Being in HR may cause you to drink

I entered the field of HR because I see the connection between people and organizational goals. I enjoy finding and matching the best candidate to position, coaching managers and employees to achieve personal and professional goals, helping employees understand benefits and rights as an employee, and working through organizational issues so that the business can grow.

I think that there should be a warning label for those interested in a career in HR: being in HR may cause you to drink. There is a dark side of HR that your beloved mentor or professor may not tell you about. The HR that holds people accountable to achieve great things, also terminates those who don't make the cut. The HR that finds and matches the best candidates to positions also reduces employees so that the best employees remain in the right positions. The HR that helps employees with employee benefit issues also knows when the four-year old daughter of an employee has been diagnosed with leukemia. The HR that works through organizational issues so that a business can grow also participates in the right sizing that allows an organization to survive in tough times.

I tell candidates the good and the bad about positions so that they can make an informed decision about their future. This goes for career choices as well. I'm not saying that it is good or bad. It's just part of the job. And may cause you to drink.

Marriage is a government and business issue

I found myself unusually uncomfortable in church this weekend. The topic was about California’s recent action to overturn the Gay marriage ban.

I do not normally discuss politics or religion, but this post happens to be about both and neither. California voters approved a ban on gay marriages (also known as Proposition 8) a few months ago, but the US Supreme Court has recently ruled that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional because it denies same-sex couples the right to due process and equal protection. The argument that I heard in church was that marriage is a sacrament and should not be defined by the government. I get that and agree that marriages may be defined by a spiritual connection through a religious institution for some people. However, marriage is a business issue because it impacts the company’s bottom line, specifically in benefit costs. Spouses may be eligible for benefits such as employer sponsored health insurance, FMLA and social security. Employers have and will continue to define spouses in their benefit plan documents as necessary, but the game changes when we talk about benefits provided by the federal government. Regardless of your opinion about the definition of marriage, religion or politics, businesses have to define who is eligible for benefits normally reserved for “spouses” in plan documents, which makes this a government and business issue.