Sender: |
|
Date: |
Tue, 5 Sep 2006 10:55:38 -0700 |
Content-Disposition: |
inline |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Well, so much of this discussion is linked to power hierarchies within
an organization and how powerful and persuasive an HR department might
be. Let's face it, many medium to smaller organizations do not have HR
departments, and even those present in the larger institutions are at
the beck and call of upper management and have little power to address
only but the most egregious situations in either hiring or employment
practices. Also a big determinant is your state law and whether you
live in a right to work state or not.
In my own experience I have witnessed several times managers who run
amok - who had no management training to speak of, and who got away
with some outrageous behaviours. When it became apparent that the
organization migh face a lawsuit then the managers were either
"retired" with a bonus, or a settlement was paid to hush up the
situation.
I have also had a senior HR person explain to me that they had no
power other than to complain to senior management and that although
they encouraged fairness that it was not a requirement of managers or
directors or vice-persidents to act in a fair manner to employees or
colleagues. I also once attended a training session with an HR
representative who, in response to a question, said, "We're a private
company, the constitution and the bill of rights doesn't apply here".
I found that rather ironic since this was coming from a manager in a
large American History museum. (He IS right, the consitituion and the
bill or rights pertains to expressly governmental behavior towards its
citizens).
Even though there is anti-discrimination law - it can be easily and
subtly bypassed so that a hiring manager pretty much gets what he/she
wants - as long as the decision can be rationalized and supported in
other criteria, then the reason for hiring a "young" person can be
left unstated but implicit.
There is also no requirement for organizations to act in a
compassionate manner. They are sometimes quite ruthless with employees
and can also be very flexible and understanding. Again, I have seen
more than a measure of the "understanding" extended to senior managers
and far less to hourly employees. But in fairness, I have seen
extraordinary compassion practiced to some who at the very bottom of
the pay scale - it depends so much more on the individual manager than
on the organization.
There is a "culture" within any organization and it really behooves
the job applicant to learn as much about this before either applying
or accepting a position. I have always felt that it is a good practice
to interview prospective managers and colleagues as rigiously as you
might be interviewed to gain an awareness of the dynamics of the
organization that you may be working for. This communicates to them
that you are quite serious as well as showing that you want to be
prepared to step in and be ready for that position should they be
inclined to hire you.
Cheers!
Dave
David Harvey
Conservator
Los Angeles, California
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
|
|
|