When HR Policies Clash with Humanity: Should We Have Helped a Colleague in Crisis?

Hi all,

One incident happened in our office where an employee with poor financial conditions was facing a critical situation. His father was admitted to the hospital ICU, and he urgently required financial help for further treatment. One of the employees sent an email to the entire group to inform them of the need for funds for the needy employee. The needy employee genuinely required funds, as it was verified. Unfortunately, no initiative was taken by HR in this regard.

However, for the sake of humanity, two employees took the initiative and collected funds in the form of donations from the office staff by going desk to desk. Based on the salary scales of the employees, a minimum donation amount was set: Rs 200 for associate level employees, Rs 500 for team leads, and Rs 1000 for managers. We collected a total of 30K funds and sent them to the needy employee.

In response, HR disagreed, stating that the step taken was not correct according to HR norms as it might set an expectation level among the other employees if they or their family members fall ill in the future. HR mentioned they stayed silent on the issue for this reason.

Questions for HR Professionals

As an HR professional, please answer the following questions:

1. Did we act wrongly?
2. What should our HR have done after reading the donation requirement email?
3. Is it right that employees might develop expectations in the future, and is it correct that we should not have helped the needy employee?
4. Should we have stayed quiet and simply made donations of our choosing, even if the amount was only 1 to 2 thousand?

Please provide your feedback. I am not from an HR background and, despite doing a good deed, I feel disheartened by the criticism. I am willing to accept if it was indeed wrong.

Financial Assistance for Employees in Distress

When an employee is under financial distress, they might approach their employer asking for monetary help. This could be in the form of either a financial loan or ex gratia. While the former has the obligation of repayment, the latter does not.

In your company's case, the needy employee should have approached for ex gratia. Did they submit a formal application? Possibly not.

You mentioned that one of the employees circulated an email to help the needy employee. The official means of communication was used to circulate the email, and the collection of money also took place on the office premises. However, for the employees who made contributions, it was in their personal capacity. Some informal dealings may occur on the office premises, and the employer cannot have 100% control over them.

From your post, it can be deduced that the employer was upset because the activity of money collection was done on the office premises. Whether the employer contributed anything is unknown, but most likely, there was no contribution. Now, the employer is concerned that the administration of the company might be perceived as impervious or inclement. He must have expressed his fear to HR, hence HR's view that the collection of contributions was wrong.

Anyway, whatever happened cannot be undone. All of you have done what you felt was noble. Debating whether HR was right or wrong is meaningless. Forget the incident and move on!

Thanks, Dinesh Divekar

HR's Role in Rule Application

HR should not be entirely rule-bound and mechanical in the application of rules. Rules are for guidance as well as implementation. However, if help can be rendered between the lines, why not? The collection of money from employees personally is something that can be overlooked, and HR can remain officially unaware (in this case, as the event has already taken place).

After a few days, HR can suggest to higher management a scheme of ex gratia or a loan to employees facing dire emergencies. HR can also subtly indicate to employees not to use the company email ID for such purposes and not to engage in fundraising on company premises.

Planning for Health Emergencies

Health emergencies can occur at any time. This opportunity can be used to educate employees on planning for health insurance, setting aside some amount for rainy days, and future needs.

Addressing the Incident

Returning specifically to this incident, HR may be right in their own way as such collection of money may give rise to further demands in emergencies, and employees may be reluctant, resulting in poor interpersonal relations. Being helpful is always good but within the parameters of administration.

Proposed HR Actions

The best thing HR can do now is to frame a scheme based on the financial health of the company for the approval of higher-up officials and on a genuine education scheme to advise employees to set aside money for emergencies and as financial savings in the right instruments. These schemes and education are for purely voluntary learning and action by employees at their discretion without further advice or encouragement from the company.

Types of Financial Assistance for Employees

In an establishment, there exist three types of mechanisms to provide help and assistance to an employee who is experiencing financial distress:

1. Company grants loan
2. Loan from a credit co-operative society run by the employee
3. Financial assistance collected by the employee

The first kind of assistance is processed upon an application made by the employee seeking financial help due to distress. Unfortunately, it is often the case that extending financial help to employees is hardly available in time, takes a longer time to process, or does not happen at all.

In many establishments, employees have their credit co-operative society, from which an employee can obtain a loan as per the norms to meet unexpected expenses. Alternatively, employees collectively decide to assist a colleague in distress by pooling funds from co-employees when formal mechanisms are lacking.

Typically, employees pursue this idea with the assistance of the HR department. However, in cases of urgent need, the HR department should view the situation as taking action for a critical situation akin to aiding a dying person. Delving deeper into the issue by the HR department may lead to industrial unrest. A proactive HR approach should consider this as an opportunity to establish or enhance existing welfare facilities for employees within the establishment.

HR's Role in Addressing Employee Financial Assistance

In this particular case, HR should have acted smartly. Upon knowing the process, HR should have discussed with the management, secured some amount to be sanctioned and paid to the employee, along with the amount collected by the employees directly at a gathering organized. In that specific forum, HR can appreciate the good work done by the employees for the noble cause and communicate that such a process goes against the discipline of any organization. HR should inform them that in case of such exigencies, the matter should be brought to the notice of HR so that they can address it with the management.

By following this approach, both purposes are served: appreciating the good work done by some employees and preventing the repetition of such acts by explaining the organizational interest and the importance of discipline.

Thanks and regards,
Kamesh

The Importance of Supporting Employees in Need

As HR professionals, we should not turn a blind eye to the needs or circumstances surrounding our fellow employees. As humans, sometimes issues, particularly difficulties, can hinder our thinking capacity and performance at work. The scenario under discussion deserves a 'thumbs up' as it clearly shows that in that work environment, the workers care for and have concern for one another, which should not be discouraged.

The action one of the employees took is equivalent to staff motivating and uplifting fellow staff.

In my workplace, we have given the go-ahead to such noble causes, especially in cases where the employer is not obligated to offer financial assistance. Situations calling for such actions are analyzed by a committee of ordinary staff members who are not part of management. Once it is agreed that there should be a collection, whatever is collected along with a list of names and amounts is handed over to HR for onward forwarding to the concerned staff and for record-keeping.

Therefore, if this was the first instance in the workplace under discussion, HR should assess what transpired and set guidelines rather than reprimanding, despising, or discouraging the initiator. I only hope that HR disagreed because he/she was not the initiator and did not see the need for assistance. Sometimes, for change to take place, something has to happen.

HR was officially informed about the financial need of the employee. HR was also included on the email thread sent by one of the employees (as I discussed above).

If you are in HR and receive such a request, what would be your next move?

A couple of employees also went to HR, somewhat complaining about us collecting the funds and setting a minimum limit (although it was not enforced), although we did insist.

Dear Colleague, I do not see why HR should frown upon the spontaneous action by well-meaning colleagues to help their coworker in distress by collecting contributions at the workplace. In fact, as good management, they should have some insurance scheme in place to take care of such health emergencies. In this case, HR should have shown sensitivity by taking the initiative and pushing decision-makers for financial assistance to the needy, at least equal to the voluntarily collected sum of contributions by the colleagues. For the future, HR should develop a suitable policy to take care of such vital health emergencies.

Regards, Vinayak Nagarkar HR Consultant

Role of HR in Employee Support Initiatives

In the absence of a clear policy in this regard, HR professionals may have initially played innocent, as they could neither be seen at the forefront nor could they come out against it. It is better that in such instances, non-HR colleagues take the lead, and HR remains in the background.

In larger groups, such instances often occur where co-employees generously contribute to help a colleague in dire straits. To give it a different color other than genuine humanitarian aid should not be attempted. Instances like this happen quite often, but there should not be any compulsion to contribute. Setting minimum contribution levels helps, although it should not be insisted upon.

HR's Role in Developing Policies

After the event is over, HR now asking questions to those who took the initiative cannot be seen as appreciable. Indeed, HR has a larger role to play by developing a formal/informal policy to address such contingencies.

Hi, Anonymous! The situation you mentioned does happen. At a macro level, there is nothing wrong with helping a person through family, friends, acquaintances, or colleagues; it is very humane. However, we are governed by systems, processes, declared or undeclared rules, regulations, and a code of conduct in every family, group, organization, including the very NGOs that are out there to help. There are processes and hierarchies.

If we closely observe, we apply this in our sphere of influence, reaching a commanding level, all to ensure that things are done with clarity, approvals, transparency, and accountability post vetting of pros and cons while helping or doing anything that is not defined as a "norm."

Etiquette in every sphere of life

Firstly, let's assume there was some misunderstanding or dispute in collection and disbursal or accidental wrong crediting. Whom are you going to take up the matter with, the police or the HR of the company? Ideally, HR. Then why not approach HR in the first place and make the move?

Personal decision and company protocol

Secondly, the decision to help here is a purely personal decision. How can all the colleagues or staff be approached using the official email ID? Can the argument stand in the company's internal addressing system or the law? What kind of precedence are we setting, and where is the discipline of hierarchy?

If the act was done by transmitting or forwarding the help request through a personal mobile or personal email ID, then nobody stops and questions anyways as the system and processes are not broken. Your personal decision cannot be imposed on any organization, let alone the company you work in.

I hope this helps. Any value-add is welcome and appreciated. I just shared my best. If it can be improved, it's welcome.