HR works for the company or the employees???
CiteLegal
 
HOME RISE NEW ABOUT LOGIN
Home > Discussion Boards > General Discussion

HR works for the company or the employees???

supriyamanocha Started The Discussion:

As an HR person, many times I find myself in a situation where I do not know whom to favor - Employee or the company. I know at that point, the employee is right but I get confused with company loyalty. Also in such a situation, even if you want to back up the employee, you find yourself being pressurised by the seniors.

Does it happen with all of us??? In such a situation whom do we work for??? - Employee or the Company??

Aren't we taught to be emphathetic, to work for employees, to solve employee's problem; as an HR? Then why do the gears shift when the real situation arises?

Let us take an example of the situation I once faced. There used to be the company policy that for an employee who does not serve the notice period, there will be no experience letter, rather he'll be served as one who stopped coming to work without informing an dhe'll be terminated. But later the policy changed and such an employee was given the releiving letter which stated that the person did not serve the notice period and can not work for a competitor till the expiry of the notice period.

In one particular case, the employee informed his senior that he is discontinuing his job and is resigning because of some urgency at home. Seniors tried to convince him, and finally told him to come back after attending to the problem. Now since the employee had already resigned, he did not return, but the seniors were angry because they had processed the employee's salary by mistake. So they started a termination procedure against him, though the policy had already changed. In such a case shouldn't HR try to maintain the relations with the employee or should go with the company, even though teh policy had already changed??

I think almost all the HR employees might have faced a similar situation. Now what should be the HR's take on this?

na75369 - Member Since: May 2008
Even I used to think that HR is for employees when i was a baccha.
But after some experiences I came to know that HR works only for the management....for monetory profit of the company.....and employees are treated as slaves and in some cases even HR employees are treated in a bad manner by their seniors.
The main role of HR is to trap employees by telling lies and convincing them to work for non-competetive/less salary.

Sanjeev.Himachali - Member Since: Oct 2006
I think you are having role-conflict. HR is not to favor anyone. HR is not working for any specific individual or team of individuals but rather HR works for the company. The role of HR is to coach and motivate the employees in such a way that they give their best and thereby help the company grow. In the process, these individuals also grows. At work-place, performance is important and emotions can take the back-seat.
As far as HR is concerned, you are paid by the company not by an individual or specific department, hence your loyalty should be with the company. Within the company, you are governed by the guidelines of the company.
In the case mentioned by you, did you managed to do the investigation? Do you know what is the exact communication between that employee and his manager? Do you know why he actually left – does he had any genuine problem or he joined the competitor? Do you know what type of information he was carrying about the company or the data? If you do not have proper answers to these questions then you should not react the way you did.
I hope this will help.
Thanks and Regards

priyankareddyavuthu - Member Since: Jul 2008
hey hi frnds is it true am pursuing MBA in 2nd yr. am thinking tht HR works for both (as a mediator between Employees & company!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

priyankareddyavuthu - Member Since: Jul 2008
but 1 thing i heared tht mostly HR persons hav Possessiveness?????????? i dont think so will you accept wit thz ???????

supriyamanocha - Member Since: Jul 2006
Sanjeev I can answer all your questions... I know what was the exact communication between the management & the employee since I was sitting there only; the employee left since he had to move to his native place to attend some family problem, and did not join any co. for the next six months (by the time he was attending to the problem); he did not carry any kind of sensitive information (he had in fact, joined the co. only six months back); Now tell me is this the wrong way to react or have you changed ur opinion?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sanjeev.Himachali View Post
I think you are having role-conflict. HR is not to favor anyone. HR is not working for any specific individual or team of individuals but rather HR works for the company. The role of HR is to coach and motivate the employees in such a way that they give their best and thereby help the company grow. In the process, these individuals also grows. At work-place, performance is important and emotions can take the back-seat.
As far as HR is concerned, you are paid by the company not by an individual or specific department, hence your loyalty should be with the company. Within the company, you are governed by the guidelines of the company.
In the case mentioned by you, did you managed to do the investigation? Do you know what is the exact communication between that employee and his manager? Do you know why he actually left does he had any genuine problem or he joined the competitor? Do you know what type of information he was carrying about the company or the data? If you do not have proper answers to these questions then you should not react the way you did.
I hope this will help.
Thanks and Regards

Sanjeev.Himachali - Member Since: Oct 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by supriyamanocha View Post

In one particular case, the employee informed his senior that he is discontinuing his job and is resigning because of some urgency at home. Seniors tried to convince him, and finally told him to come back after attending to the problem. Now since the employee had already resigned, he did not return, but the seniors were angry because they had processed the employee's salary by mistake. So they started a termination procedure against him, though the policy had already changed. In such a case shouldn't HR try to maintain the relations with the employee or should go with the company, even though teh policy had already changed??

I think almost all the HR employees might have faced a similar situation. Now what should be the HR's take on this?
My reply is in red.

In one particular case, the employee informed his senior that he is discontinuing his job and is resigning because of some urgency at home. Seniors tried to convince him, and finally told him to come back after attending to the problem. (Did they accepted his resignation or left it open? That is decided to wait for his return. If they accepted the resignation, does the employee completed his exit formalities, that is hand-over take-over; clearance from other departments etc; if not then this is not a case of resignation but a case of “being absconding” and need to be treated accordingly).

Now since the employee had already resigned, he did not return, but the seniors were angry because they had processed the employee's salary by mistake (how come his seniors can process the salary? I think you are in HR and not his seniors, hence you should be processing his salary and not they. According to your clarification, this individual didn’t joined any company for 6 months as he was busy with his family problem and now he has joined some company for last 6 months. This means that it is already one year since the time he has left your company. So, why after one year, you or this fellow found the need to get relieving letter or full and final???)

So they started a termination procedure against him, though the policy had already changed. In such a case shouldn't HR try to maintain the relations with the employee or should go with the company, even though the policy had already changed?? (Once the employee has already left, why there is a need for HR to maintain any relation with an ex-employee?? Do you have a policy of re-hiring ex employees??).

In the whole process, I think you forgot to mention few things:
1)For how long does this employee worked in your company?
2)What was his role / level in the company?
3)Since how long are you working in this company and what is your level?
4)
I think, answer to these questions will be required to understand your problem and how you can solve it.

Thanks and Regards
Sanjeev

Found This Useful? +Vote Up This Page Via Google.  

Why Vote? User validation is extremely important for good content to prosper.
Disclaimer: This network and the advice provided in good faith by our members only facilitates as a direction towards the actions necessary. The advice should be validated by proper consultation with a certified professional. The network or the members providing advice cannot be held liable for any consequences, under any circumstances.






Explore Topical Knowledge Areas



DISCUSSSION STATISTICS


3112
VIEWS

6
REPLIES

PLEASE KEEP YOUR CONDUCT PROFESSIONAL AND POLITE


3M Users, 100K+ Documents & 450K+ Discussions

Share »

Community Support & Professional Insights. Login or Register.
Email/Username     Password  

About Us - Advertise - Contact Us - RSS   On Google+  
All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Terms Of Service
Facebook Page | Follow Us On Twitter | Linkedin Network