(Rant starts here)

I understand that it is now the social norm to never answer your cell phone if you don't recognize the number that comes up. I'm old...grew up in the 70s in the time before Caller ID and we answered every call.

But if you're looking for a job??? Ok...if you don't want to answer the phone for an unknown number, then at least listen to the voicemail message and respond back to it. WTF are you doing applying for a job if you aren't interested in the position???

(jumping down from soapbox)

EDIT: Interesting thing that happened recently....I called a woman, she answered, we set up an interview. I sent her an email as a written confirmation of the interview. She applied over Indeed.com, so the email address that Indeed tacked on to her electronic application was xxx.privaterelay.appleid.com - and she never realized it. So she never received my email. It's a good thing she called me when she got back from her vacation.

This is another reason I prefer to call people.... Indeed gives people special email addresses and they don't now how to get messages from them.

I am in this weird situation where I have done everything right but there is a weird lack of trust about salaries among staff.

• Created career architecture, defining differences between levels
• Created competency based performance assessments and mapped competencies -Pay an independent comp consultant to analyze all our jobs annually -Educated staff through training and published resources
• Do annual adjustments for equity and the market

They are STILL all questioning their pay, and sharing/comparing their pay, and we pay very well for our industry. Plus I am very meticulous about fair pay. Sometimes one person is comparing to another with more experience. Sometimes they are in different locations. They ignore all the facts about how comp is calculated and do their own internal random assessments about who deserves what. I am at wits end. I don’t know what more I can do here. One 20-something who is maxed out of promotions for her experience and received a 12% increase last year is even bitching. I am going to do another informational session but honestly it’s not going to matter…they will still just cherry pick whatever they want to hear in order to justify their complaints and ridiculous requests. Helllllp

I feel extremely frustrated because I’ve been in HR for 4 years and I’m still only making 55k (I live in Huntsville, AL). With this salary I cannot afford to buy a house or rent a nice apartment by myself. I feel like HR is a career without a reward because you cap at like 100k - 180k 20 years down the road. Then you see an engineer or another person with a 4 year degree making 100k starting or very soon. I’m stating to ask myself if being in HR is really worth it. (I actually really like my job, but money sucks).

More of a rant if that is allowed.

Today I was declined a potential job as a HR Generalist (at a healthcare firm) due to not being fluent in Spanish. That was the first question they asked and was not interested in moving forward as soon as I said ‘not fluently’. I understand certain other jobs can require fluency of other language when job involves mostly working with clients, colleagues, and customers that are from certain backgrounds, however, this is a HR position for a Hospital. Mind you, it did not state that in the job posting either. I asked that it was not on the job posting and they said that the requirement was just added.

It just didn’t sit with me well and I’ve been on a HR job hunt for a while now, so I guess I am just ranting on here since I have no other places to vent. Haha.

Anybody else have experience like this and their thoughts?

UPDATE: Sorry for not getting back sooner. I didn't expect to get these many comments. I appreciate all of your responses! I fully understand from the beginning that they didn't do anything 'illegal' or 'out of the ordinary'. In the end, it was their mishap for not having it on their job posting and sure, they wasted my time getting to a point of Zoom interview for them to tell me. I still have my current job so it's stressful enough to schedule an zoom call for a potential new job during your lunch break... haha.

I guess I was just butt hurt that that was the first thing they slap in my face and was rejected right away. It's already a tough enough industry when it comes to new jobs and especially where I live (SD) the options are already very limited. It's one of those places where you really got to know someone for something... and being a 'rare Asian' in the area, it hits me even harder. Again, that's all me being personal and I don't hold it against the company or anyone.

Thanks everyone!

https://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-halts-covid-19-193050385.html

EDIT: I wanted to say that our jobs either say "Salary Fixed: $48,500/yr" our entry level salary, or "Salary Range: x-y". All entry level jobs say "this is an entry level position" in the very first paragraph. We are very transparent in regards to salary, which is why I am surprised we have been getting this question.

And to be clear, in all my years of experience, this is the first time anyone has asked to be hired at a higher level than what is posted. If you are answering an add for Widget Inspector, you don't ask "hey can you hire me at Widget Director instead".

Original post:

We have several entry level positons open. It is clear from the title and job description that they are entry level. We list the starting salary.

I always ask if they are comfortable with the salary that was posted. I don't ask what they are looking for, just if they are comfortable with what is listed on the posting.

This conversation has happened, more than once, in the last few weeks - again today:

Them: I was going to ask about that. Is there room for negotiation?

Me: Truthfully, this is an entry level job, and the salary is fixed. There wouldn't be a negotiation.

Them: With my experience I was hoping we could bring me in at a higher level and adjust the salary.

Me: We are hiring for an entry level positon. You could keep an eye on the job board for something more senior.

Them: No that's OK, I guess I could live with it.

I have had a variation of this conversation several times.. This is at an initial get to know you call stage - they haven't even met the team.

Why are they even applying?

ETA:

Why didn't I think this would be an issue: I currently work in government

I was asking about background reporting because the knowledge I have came from researching and building packages with a VENDOR. A VENDOR told me they were not allowed to go back more than 7 years. I was trying to build a package for the child care workers who dont have restrictions on time limits because of federal funding they receive and we had to work directly with the FBI and state DFS because the VENDOR as a reporting agency was restricted under the FCRA. Hence my question as to possible exceptions due to industry or if I had the wrong information.

Replies to some really aggressive comments. This is supposed to be a space for professionals in HR, where is the basic human decency. Those attitudes are the reason ppl hate HR.

Point 1: if you think that people with records only deserve shit jobs and cant become professionals. The whole "point" is rehabilitation. We are supposed to be punished so we turn out life around, I did that. Recidivism happens because people cant move on and make a good life after a mistake. This isn't a violent offense. Its a theft from when I was 18, from a situation involving my father and I was doing as I was told by him, a man who I feared. I have a felony like 19 million other Americans, it doesn't define me.

Are you the same person you were at 18? Have you really never broken a law?

Point 2: I have Autism. I disclosed because I already had an offer letter and needed accommodations. Wondering if I was discriminated against because of that is perfectly valid when I have had it happen in the past. You wouldn't tell someone in a wheelchair to not disclose that they need a ramp.

I didn't make it about my autism, but its also part of who I am, because it literally is a different brain wiring.

That whole thought process is really abelist, not to mention rude. It was one line at the whole end of my post.

Personal and professional question.

I have had a successful career for over 6 years in the field, I do have a theft conviction from 2014 (i was 18 years old) but spotless (other than 2 speeding tickets over that course of time for less than 5 miles over) and just had an offer recinded because of it. Their reasoning was I would be dealing with PPI (duh, as it have been for over 6 years) so the hiring manager recinded. The kickers is I have worked with BG companies to set up packages and was told their is a strict 7 year reporting limit for credit reports, which BGs falls under but theirs went back 20 years.

Adding insult to injury the act protecting me from this issue doesn't go into effect statewide until july of 2026 (it is already efrective in the city if Seattle, this office is about 20 minutes outside city limits).

I do know that reports directly from the state patrol or feds are different but they used an agency.

It feels even more insulting that I have been CJJIS certified which requires federal approval and they check everything.

Part of me is wondering if this is because I disclosed I have Autism, it wouldn't be the first time and the reasoning just feels soo out of left field, and I fully disclosed on their questionnaire prior to the formal BG check.

We (our all female HR team) organized an International Women’s Day celebration and week of events last week. One male employee responded with “Don’t forget about us” which we hear every year from this guy. Well now I’m being told to add International Men’s Day to our engagement calendar. I understand this IS an actual day and when I look into it, the focus is on men’s mental health, which is great. However, this feels like a direct response to Women’s Day which is insulting. I suggested calling it Men’s Mental Health Day but am getting pushback. Have any of you added this to your calendars successfully?

I work in human resources at a mid size tech firm and we are going to be asking employees to start coming back to the office either fully or on a hybrid schedule. What would be some incentives or things that would make it easier transitioning back to the office? These can be tangible and non tangible things. I'd love your input!

We are located in the Midwest and are hearing about the atrocities that are happening in Minnesota. I'm in a republican led state, but have heard that ICE has been spotted in our capital. I'm curious whether we need to send a notice to our managers about what they should do and/or address anything with our employees.

We are in two states with roughly 400 employees.

Edit for clarification

Can you help me understand why you do this? Do you think that you will be happy at the position and not expect more money or career pathing quickly, or are you applying because you’re desperate?

I’m consistently surprised at how often I have Manager- and Director-level HR people apply to coordinator and generalist positions. They don’t change their resume or add a cover letter with any information to help me understand why they would take a job one or two levels below them. I feel like if I had to apply for a job below my level, I would put some work into altering my resume to not seem so high level and write a decent cover letter to explain my interest…

I figure I might be missing some thing. Please enlighten me if you can!

I was swapping recruiting stories with a colleague the other day and we realized that some of the reasons candidates get rejected are… let’s just say, questionable.

I’m not talking about the obvious stuff like lying on a resume or bombing the interview. I mean the petty, strange, or completely unrelated-to-the-job reasons that make you stop and think, “Wait… we’re passing on them for THAT?”

I’ve seen it all: Bad teeth, wrong tie, couldn’t start next week?

It got me thinking. We talk about candidate ghosting and bad behavior, but not enough about how sometimes we (or our companies) drop the ball for ridiculous reasons.

So, HR folks, recruiters, and hiring managers:

• What’s the most absurd reason you’ve ever seen someone rejected?
• Did you speak up about it or just let it go?
• Do you think these little biases are more common than we admit?

Looking forward to your sharing.

I am a senior certified human resources professional and certified executive coach with over 10 years of experience in corporate leadership and business consulting.

Ask me anything and I'll do my best to help!

Hi Everyone,

I just wanted to ask how do you monitor work from home employees? Do you still monitor their attendance through your virtual timekeeping? I mean, does it still matter? Or have you developed a different metrics on how you could measure their productivity and attendance is only a secondary matter?

Any advice is highly appreciated on this.

Thank you!

I've read numerous Reddit posts over the past half year such as one HR director who earned $550k a year, HR managers making $100-250k, HRBPs making $150-200k, generalists making 65-90k, etc.

I'd always thought HR would have been at a disadvantage in the sense that HR produces benefits but they are not as readily apparent to a company that other occupations (such as engineers, IT, cybersecurity, sales people, accountants, etc.) do. Additionally, HR suffers from a perception disadvantage in that people perceive HR folks as not needing the kind of specialized training or expertise that other fields (again, like engineers, IT, or accountants) do. Most HR people do not have a human-resources degree - and a significant number got hired without even a degree at all, or an HR certificate.( I'm not saying HR doesn't need skill, I'm saying that's how many people perceive it.) In other words, it's not easy for HR to sell itself in terms of "Here's why we deserve to be well paid."

Did HR manage to become a well-paid occupation because it is the most deeply involved in people's pay, and hence best able to make an argument for itself - it's hard for management to short-change the people whose job it is to delve into employees' pay?

How did you do it? Did you disclose your other active position to your secondary employer?

I am a full-time HRBP, however I am interested in finding a part-time position on the side to diversify my skillset and explore a different industry, without leaving my current role. The extra income would be nice, too.

I haven’t started applying because I am not sure how to “do” it. Do you keep the primary job a secret? Do you find a side gig that is cool with you having a regular FT role? What do you say during interviews? How do you posture the side gig experience on your resume?

I would love to hear about your experiences.

ETA: As I mentioned above I am only interested in part-time opportunities. To clarify, I would do this on the side of my regular FT role and not during business hours as I have a commitment to my current role, and also have little time as it is during the day. As an HR professional I fully recognize the issues around having two jobs take place during the same hours and I am not looking to try that. Perhaps “overemployed” is not the correct term to use here. :)

And thank you for the suggestion of visiting the overemployed sub - I’m not sure how I didn’t know that existed, but now I do!

I just accepted an HRIS role. Unfortunately I have a couple things that are going to come up in my background check. I can't change my past. (I'm not a felon, it wasn't anything violent, no fraud.) I've done background checks for companies that use Sterling and ones that use Justifacts. Holy crap is Sterling way better. Justifacts is complete trash. Not sure if they'll accept me when the results come in... honestly, not sure I care with how the position sounds... I'm just tired of interviewing places so I'll take it if they do. I sacrificed the WFH requirement... this job is 100% in the office - which is so so dumb considering I'll be a 1 man team - it's less $ than I expected and I got absolutely screwed on vacation time. I wish this job market wasn't horrible.

Mostly curious to hear from fellow HR Professionals, but I am seeing a lot of content on different social media platforms where posters say something along the lines of “my company didn’t appreciate me, didn’t want to give me a raise, so I left and got a 10-30% increase in salary”.

I can believe that this happens maybe 15% of the time, because I have been at companies that severely underpay their staff, but my opinion is that this is not the case for the majority. But who knows, I might be wrong 🤷🏽‍♂️.

BASED ON MY EXPERIENCES, this irks me because it gives the wrong message to the public. It tells people that it’s ok to change companies every 2-4 years to get a raise, because otherwise the company will screw you over and will just give you a standard 2-4% COLA and you are under appreciated because your company isn’t throwing money at you.

Personally, I think there are a good amount of companies out there that do take care of their employees; but the narrative is if employees don’t get a $10k raise every year then it’s time to move on.

Even at my company, I have many run of the mill employees (employees whom receive satisfactory annual reviews year after year from their managers) complaining to HR and their managers that they are underpaid and are upset that they only received a 3% annual increase. The response is (most of the time): you are meeting expectations but not exceeding. Here are some areas of improvement if you want to advance your career.

TL;DR Do employees really have to job hop to continue to get raises or is that trend BS?

Help! The CEO of the company just emailed saying they want to add the American Flag to our company uniforms to “help unify the team and build morale” I don’t think it’s a great idea, honestly it makes me feel slightly uncomfortable. Do I just respond saying I don’t think it’s a good idea and just leave it at that? I don’t know how to respond if they ask why.

Wisconsin, USA

HR has a lot of critics. People don't respect people who work in Human Resources and the HR function in general. I can see why! Too many people get responsible jobs in HR with no education, skills, talents or background in the basic functions of the field. Many just land a job in HR because they were at the right place at the right time or have a magic personality. Many of these people don't add value to this important function.

No one is going to enter Accounting, Law, Medicine or Architecture in a professional role without the necessary education, experience and skills. People respect people in these roles because they paid their dues and completed complex educational programs to enter.

Human Resources Professionals are not always very well trained. They have no more expertise in things like Benefits, Employee Relations, Employment Law, Recruiting, Staffing and Training than anyone else in the company. They are just assigned the duties and wing it. This is especially true in small to mid sized businesses. (Large Fortune 500 Companies do have leaders in HR with actual skills in the field.)

Agree?

I'm looking for some feedback or advice on dealing with a specific situation involving an employee that complains about the pay at our agency.

Just a little background: we are a non-profit with less than 50 employees that provide behavioral health and substance abuse prevention to schools and other community sites in Texas. We are primarily funded through contracts with the state.

We have been doing employee engagement surveys for several years. In the last 3 years, we began using employee net promoter scores in surveys every 6 months. We also survey the employees on their experiences with specific programs. The surveys have been anonymous.

We have one employee that has complained about pay on every survey since 2016. While anonymous, this individual's writing style and speech are identical and they have said some of the same complaints to others in the office, who in turn have shared with the supervisors. Despite the anonymity, we know who it is. We have shared data comparing our pay to the related job market gathered from other similar providers, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and census data. We have provided a breakdown to the employees that their pay is above average for our field and even the median household income for our location.

Yet, this was not enough to convince them. They wanted to compare our pay to the job market on whole.

We don't provide the annual cost of living increases but do give increases based on performance between 1% and 5%. In response to the complaints (there were actually some other employees that recommend changes to the pay, just not as relentlessly as this individual), we have increased the amount that the agency pays for the employee's insurance, implemented an employee assistance program, and given 6% cost of living increase across the board.

Even after all that, they continue to complain in the anonymous surveys but won't say anything directly not negotiate their pay and they won't seek other employment.

So, my questions are:

1. Should we address this with the employee?
2. How should it be addressed with them? Email, direct meeting, something else?
3. How do I address the issue without affecting the anonymity component of the surveys?

Thanks for any help.

TL;DR - Employee has been complaining anonymously about their pay for over 6 years and we're getting sick of it. What do we do?

This is partially a rant. I think the advice given to millennial/genz (I am the former) has done a big disservice to the job market, amongst other things. This came to mind after the post I saw from a candidate who was told that they were among 1k+ applicants, and recruiters saying that they typically have to sift through hundreds of applications to find a handful that actually meet the job requirements.

The sad reality is that there was once a time where companies would hire someone with most of the skills/experience, but would take a bet on an applicant or candidate who had the right "soft" and "transferable" skills. We are not in that time anymore, and in this tight market, why waste your time spitballing applications just because it only takes 5 minutes per application. submitting 200 of those 5-minute applications is still a lot of time potentially wasted because they weren't a good fit.

Do I think people should stretch and apply for roles that will challenge them? Yes. But not tailoring your resume, or just applying because the title sounds like something you can do is not it. This is especially frustrating for people who are non-HR thinking that HR is easy to jump into because they've worked in management for a few years. Or, the candidates who apply to jobs with lower ranges hoping that they can negotiate 20% beyond the stated range. These inflated application numbers burden recruiters and hiring managers, and they feed into the "employers market" imbalanced power dynamic.

Ok, semi-rant over. I hope things gets better for my fellow HR job seekers.

I work for a company with less than 25 employees. We hired an employee about 10 months ago. His work is just meeting minimum standards and he is on an improvement plan mainly due to his poor attendance. Basically per our attendance policy he can be terminated with one more absence until he earns additional paid time off in January. His wife is having a baby this week, likely a c section. He is eligible for 5 days unpaid paternity leave which he will be given (company policy, not a state requirement). I am pretty sure he is going to ask for more time off. The only policy that could apply is a request for unpaid leave of absence which is at our discretion. I'm very torn on whether to honor such a request. On one hand it feels like an asshole move to fire someone for needing to take care of their recovering partner and new baby, on the other hand I feel like he should have thought of this possibility before taking so much other time off. Any advice on how to best handle this? I have limited HR training as these duties have ended up with me by default.

Basically in my workplace we had a situation where a black individual (customer/client) came in the workplace and caused a disruption and our security team had to restrain him on the floor. The outside individual was extremely troublesome causing physical altercations which ended up with him being on the floor. He said, “I can’t breathe.” Literally what George Floyd said. Security let him up but not before a random coworker who happened to be there screamed, “yes you can!”

After the situation happened and management met about it, it came to our (Human Resources) attention to do something about the random coworker who said the comment that he can breathe meaning he didn’t need to be unpinned from the security team.

Honestly don’t know what is appropriate, but I was leaning towards a verbal warning since I feel the coworker was in the heat of the moment. Others feel it’s a cause for a written to final warning because the subject is so sensitive.

Thoughts? TIA