#hr

Also, HR: you're fired!

Were they impacted too or is it too early to tell given that this is most likely an all week affair.

It’s honestly wild, good for them buddying up with M.L. from the start and getting in his ear on who to cut, that’s worked out well so far! (For them) ….But hey smart move by HR, they all get promoted and never laid off. I’m not saying they don’t provide value overall, but I find it odd/maybe the reason that they are the kingpins of this failing company…

I’m in the US and new at PayPal. What is the process followed by HR? Does the person affected being laid off get the meeting invite? How does the rest of the team or manager find out who has been let go from their team?

Do you think HR (or whoever) that makes the layoff decisions gets a bounty (bonus) for every life they ruin?

Just askin'.

Heard from someone it will be all week which is so brutal. What a nightmare of a company. I’m sure I. Cruz over HR is sleeping just fine though.

If you don't relocate, are you still eligible for retiree medical? They are coding it as Voluntary Resignation. Does it matter what HR codes it in Workday? I'm on my wife's plan currently, but we would like to use Chevron's medical when she retires.
Talked to HR but not sure if they have it right. They told me it doesn't matter what HR codes it in Workday- I would still be eligible for retiree medical when there is a life event. Is that right?

A few months ago I was talking to a recruiter about coming back to Fidelity after I got laid off. When I spoke to them, they said something like "it's a huge relief I don't have to explain that whole connect week thing to you compared to other people I call". They also said "yeah... it's gonna be an experiment".

From the outside looking in, you can tell a lot of these people in HR have opinions on what's going on that they don't want to be outward about. Anti bootlicking opinions. Or at least that's what I see. They hate the new laws of the land, they're just the ones that have to enforce them.

So, if you're in HR, if you feel comfortable sharing, what do you think about all this?

Has anyone noticed a shift in the way internal job postings are being handled lately.

I’ve been at Citi over a decade, and historically, the internal application process was relatively predictable. If you met the minimum qualifications, you would typically see your status move from "Application Received" to "Recruiter Review."

Recently, I’ve applied for several roles where I meet the qualifications, yet the applications sit in the "Application Received" phase for weeks and then are rejected. I haven't received one interview, and I have been making it a point to apply within the first 48 hours of the posting. I know these are real roles because I can see in Workday that some have been filled.

Has the HR screening process changed? I’ve never experienced this and I’m wondering if I am the only one that is.

What was that.. 12 mins of content circleje*k with no updates or results and 40 mins of questions that don’t tell us sh1t.

Basically confirmed future reductions and refused to even acknowledge the question about what quartile cost we’re in now..

Intel is such a trash company. The management is allowed to make decisions that ruin the company for it's employees. Management does not care about anyone below them and will sc--w you over at any cost. Intel HR likes to drive around the parking lot recording people with their dash cams in an attempt to fire them for time clock fraud. Intel isn't what is once was. Horrible decisions made my management has ruined what could be a good thing.

Our HR at 294 when she closed with us Sunday clocked everyone out on her own. We were waiting on her. Then we had bag checks. Isn’t this illegal ?

Is it happening on 25th or are these again baseless rumours like 18th.
Although got to know from HR that it will happen in phases and the first batch of layoff will definitely be in August.

I thought about an exit interview, but why bother? HR won't listen. So it'll be a short email and a clean break. No notice. I'm just done.

Are they a thing?

Is it normal to be terminated with just supervisor and manager/boss on the call? No HR.?

Before we proceed with anything, I’d like to inform you that managers will receive an invitation from HR to attend a training session. This session will provide information on when employees will be notified and what managers need to do next.

Have any managers received this invitation yet?

This will be Judas Moriarty’s 3rd failure in a row.
1 Morningstar Retirement Calculator

• never implemented Cost 180k per year x 3 years
  2 FIS Fiasco - Loss of $4B in client assets
  (should have been canned then)
  3 - New Offshoring Partnership
  Big trouble ahead everyone knows this.

Think about it - Who is going to want to business with MOA - with Judas profile on it ?

This is a flawed individual with deep narcissistic character issues - a true technical mo--n.

Leadership has learned no lessons from the past - Rough future for MOA

Look the other way leadership - this is on you - How long before HR starts sending out excuses !

I just Effin love how they delete questions.

Whoever that HR woman is, you give absolutely no warm and fuzzy feelings to everyone who feels unsafe or unsure in this environment.

What is the deal with dress codes at the office? Remember 2019? You'd get that email saying "reminder: business casual, no tennis shoes" like it's a bouncer at a nightclub for accountants. Somebody's checking your shoes before you send your first teams message.

Now? Now it's like the dress code just....left. Didn't even give two weeks' notice. Guys are coming in wearing hoodies, shorts, Birkenstocks. Birkenstocks! You know, the shoe that says "I'm not choosing between comfort and sandals, I'm doing BOTH, and I dare you to say something in the 10am meeting."

And nobody says anything! Where's the email now? Where's HR? I think HR saw the Birkenstocks and just gave up. They're on another floor somewhere, in sweatpants, eating a sandwich, going "you know what, let 'em wear the sandals."

Someone posted awhile back that they did successfully get their end date changed. Yesterday it seems almost everyone I know that was attempting this, received the same statement from HR stating that their end date would not be changed "due to business needs" with no further explanation. Just curious if the person that posted they did get their end date changed actually did, and how they did this, what avenue they took. When I've asked about the business need (our team is slow and having to scramble daily to find work, so I'm not seeing this business need on our team when we are over staffed) but get a generic answer-and not really an answer at all. I love how the company continues to promote the culture of "transparency", "Mission Simplify", etc....

Who else filed? Discrimination, Retaliation and a hostile work environment. This place wreaks of it! Are they piling up while HR does nothing? When the EEOC sees Nike as the employer it’s a front row seat to a charge.

Did anyone else get HRR email?
This is the first time getting this

I was let go in April due to a RIF A colleague of mine was let go in March. Same organization and same state we are out of (Georgia). Re both non-management exempt employees…were anyways. How about I found out his manager got his PTO paid out! Whereas I didn’t get any PTO because I didn’t know it was an option for my manager to possibly work it out with HR to have it paid out (or added to the severance). I am livid as I would have fought for this if I’d known it was an option!! Just be aware if you are in one of the states that doesn’t have to pay out PTO…fight for it anyways! I have reached out to HR complaining about this But of course I’m sure absolutely nothing will come of it Smdh!!!

Anyone else catching wind of HR cracking down on the required hours in office? I heard a rumor of a VP having a discussion with some salary ACs and told them 8 hours in the requirement. 1. Why are they literally bringing down the hammer? 2. I’ve never once stayed longer than 6 hours in the 6 years I’ve worked there. 3. Why are salary workers being mandated to stay for a certain amount of time? You’re paying them to do a job; not to do something for a set amount of time. I’m so sick of this bs. How can HR be okay with something for YEARS and then decide it’s no longer OK to leave early. Loosen up the handcuffs a little, jfc.

What are the next planned round of layoffs? No speculation please but someone in the know please do tell.

Humana, PLEASE give us raises that keep uo with inflation.

Every employee, every year, should be receiving an annual raise that percentage wise to their current salary exceeds the current rate of inflation.

The math shouldn’t be that hard for you. I am confident you HR and Financial Consultants, and Actuaries can figure it out.

An HR expert believes many employees are hired into roles that don't suit them because employers refuse to pay competitive salaries. They then remain in those jobs for years, receiving little meaningful feedback, before eventually being dismissed or made redundant.

Kate Underwood, founder of Southampton-based Kate Underwood HR and Training, said the result was that workers lost "valuable" years of their careers "without ever being told the truth". Kate said employers often complained that they "can't find good staff", when in reality they're offering salaries that fail to attract the right candidates.

She added: "'Nobody wants to work anymore' is the most comforting sentence in British business, because it puts the fault out there somewhere. It is almost never true. There's no shortage of people who want to work. There's a shortage of people willing to do that job, for that money, in that building."

According to Kate, businesses frequently compromised during recruitment, hiring the best candidate from a weak pool of applicants before convincing themselves things will improve.
The bigger problem, she said, was what happened next. Rather than addressing performance issues early or admitting the role needs to be paid more competitively, employers often keep someone in post for years because replacing them would cost more.

Kate added: "Owners tell me they're keeping someone on out of kindness. I have never once found that to be the actual reason.

"You're not keeping him out of loyalty. You're keeping him because letting him go means admitting what the job actually costs.

"That is not kindness. That is a cost-saving measure with a human being in it."

Kate believes this can be devastating for the employee, who may have no idea their employer has already lost confidence in them.

She said: "Gary is 34. He's spent three years being quietly tolerated.

"Nobody has told him the truth... He thinks he's fine. He's walking around with a completely false picture of his own working life and everyone in that building except him knows it."

She said that by avoiding honest conversations, employers denied workers the opportunity to improve or find a role where they are better suited.

Kate added: "He'll find out eventually. When the business cracks, or gets sold, or when a new manager arrives with no history and does in a fortnight what should have been done in month three.

"You didn't spare him anything. You took years off his career because you couldn't face 20 minutes and a payroll decision."

Instead, Kate believes employers should recruit realistically, pay market rates and tackle performance concerns quickly rather than allowing problems to drag on.

She said: "When it isn't working, say so early, out loud, kindly, in month two rather than year three. Give the person a real chance with real support and a real deadline. If it still isn't working, let them go while they've got the confidence and the CV to land somewhere better."

The bigger problem, she said, was what happened next. Rather than addressing performance issues early or admitting the role needs to be paid more competitively, employers often keep someone in post for years because replacing them would cost more.

Kate added: "Owners tell me they're keeping someone on out of kindness. I have never once found that to be the actual reason.

"You're not keeping him out of loyalty. You're keeping him because letting him go means admitting what the job actually costs.

"That is not kindness. That is a cost-saving measure with a human being in it."

Kate believes this can be devastating for the employee, who may have no idea their employer has already lost confidence in them.

She said: "Gary is 34. He's spent three years being quietly tolerated.

"Nobody has told him the truth... He thinks he's fine. He's walking around with a completely false picture of his own working life and everyone in that building except him knows it."

She said that by avoiding honest conversations, employers denied workers the opportunity to improve or find a role where they are better suited.

Kate added: "He'll find out eventually. When the business cracks, or gets sold, or when a new manager arrives with no history and does in a fortnight what should have been done in month three.

"You didn't spare him anything. You took years off his career because you couldn't face 20 minutes and a payroll decision."

Instead, Kate believes employers should recruit realistically, pay market rates and tackle performance concerns quickly rather than allowing problems to drag on.

She said: "When it isn't working, say so early, out loud, kindly, in month two rather than year three. Give the person a real chance with real support and a real deadline. If it still isn't working, let them go while they've got the confidence and the CV to land somewhere better."

What is our true Enbridge culture?

I was asked to become a Culture Ambassador a while back and, admittedly, was skeptical, I’ve never fully trusted HR initiatives that claim to gather grassroots input. A recent meeting has me genuinely reflecting on what our actual culture is at Enbridge, as opposed to the aspirational one we often describe. I’d be interested to hear others’ perspectives.

Why is our HR department so entangled? The uncle of KC and her sister was the previous CHRO. KC and LJ were friends before their rapid promotions. BW worked with KC at another place and gets promoted even though he keeps failing. AH is related to KC's uncle. The new SD WB was brought from North Carolina and put into a role out of nowhere. The list feels like it goes on and on.

Women in Energy! Between the brain fog, fatigue and confidence taking a hit, did anyone feel HR or management quietly decided you were “past your prime”? Did you tell HR, or did you keep it to yourself? Curious if anyone’s been through this.

California employees any word on our payout HR says within 30days if u cut us pay us asap

Could have sworn it was suppose to arrive the same day as the meeting

I feel like this is something bigger than just RTO FT.
There are no jobs listed and I’m still waiting on hearing on an internal job I interviewed for weeks ago.
HR is missing in action.
This is really weird it’s like something has happened behind the scenes or they know something cataclysmic is about to drop.
But I’m getting a very bad feeling on this entire shift.
Maybe in six months or even three we’ll see the big picture but right now it’s blurrier than a Monet.

We owe Larry, Clay, and the rest of Oracle management a lot. It is easy to forget how good they are to us, we must practice gratitude. For the same reason I tip my landlord I am going to refuse my severance if I get offered and instead write the HR team and my manager a reference letter. #gratitude

Confirmed at a Verizon Connect all hands by HR. Level up is coming in November.

So hopefully this means a slow down on the layoff front at least for a time.

It's started here, sad to share, we've received an email today, whole my team. I thought my role in sales is secure, but it been told by HR that this time is most of pre-sales and 30-40% sales will be ripped.
15 years and always overachievement means nothing. even president club award 6 years ago.

Im not one that was vsp eligible, however with all the changes going on i checked my schedule in NICE IEX and i cant see anything past September 4th! Ive never had a reason to check my schedule until now. And no it has not always been that way where it shows up last minute. Im seeing lots of people being let go around that time. I havent gotten an email or teams meeting its just business as usual for my team. Im in the claims call center. My question is…..

Should i reach out to HR and ask why i cant see my schedule? My supervisor wont tell me anything