img

Return to work - aka - PR stunt

Returnships are Orgs "STAR" gimmick to appear inclusive. Sounds great on paper but far from reality. You got to ask - Are they (Returnship Programs) genuinely designed to reintegrate professionals, or are they just PR stunts? If returnships aren’t backed by real support, they’re just a way to exploit cheap labor. This about this: Lets say X person (with gender Y) is now considering - returning to work, would you value X's tech background from years ago - or would you treat them as a newbie as tech has super evolved and X is outdated. - Whatsoever X did learn, survived, and successfully pulled off - would you count that? - From a 3 hour interview you will assess the learning ability, potential, stack rank X against your current talent pool and then the judgement is delivered. - Would your assessment change if it was from a particular gender from a particular age group? - Would you be hard or discount candidates simply because they took time off for self? or are you more comfortable hearing family as a default? - How do you truly know a 45-year-old returning mother can or can’t adapt as fast as a 25-year-old? - Why is “potential” always linked to youth? - How many of you are doing your bit to offer crash introductions to help cover the gaps and a slower start instead of saying start from scratch again at 45 with over 20 years of experience? PR stunt and exploitation game - is what it will always be, until we hear "real" stories from the people. I will leave you with this to mull on. PS: Don't sell me the story of "oh! I know this uncle who is now doing some data entry work making 7k working from a phone - who would have hired him" .. THIS exactly is my problem. To "Returning" job seekers: I am sorry, we suck as a collective. To orgs: You know why.

Sign in to a Grapevine account for the full experience.

Discover More

Curated from across

img

Confessions on

by FreshRaita

Stealth

dirty tricks played by orgs to Lay Off employees

It's getting dirtier by the day and sure some orgs are still up to their dirty tricks. The models: - Appraise and then Lay Off: Why bother putting bandaid on a stab wound? Anyways the folks are going to fight how to answer the ..why were you laid off war, and now you are adding another twist.. why were you appraised and then laid off? - Low appraisals to force quit: Undervalue them so they leave on their own. It’s a leeches way to cut costs. Kill morale 100%. Severance penny spent $0. - Trap them in PIP: Dress it up however you want - very very few escape this death sentence. - Silent treatment: No assignments, No meetings. Watch them spiral into anxiety and leave to save their sanity. - Workload overload: Drown them in work until they break. No need for layoffs list until they make it to your collapse list first. - Strategic reorg: Re-organize them out of existence. Offer a demotion or a proxy role in a random team that you know they dont want as an alternative. - Sudden policy changes: oh! I have seen so many I can't keep up with this one. New policies that make their life hell. People leave to escape your pettiness. - Mandatory relocation: Demand they move to an undesirable location. Then you treat remote employees like outsiders. Exclude them from key projects, conversations until they feel like foster care kids, second-class citizens. You know the outcome from there on. - Use the "Culture Fit" excuse: Call out how they’re not a culture fit. Vague, unchallengeable, and forces them out without severance. And don't sell me "the org has got to do what it has got to do to survive" line. I don't buy that If you have seen this being done, I understand your silence, but I don't value it. If this has been done to you or someone close to you, I am sorry. Orgs and the people failed you. We could be 1000x better than what we are operating as.

img

Confessions on

by FreshRaita

Stealth

Two simple questions

1/ an employee has got a raise in his/her current org recently and then asks for raise again to switch to a different org 2/ an employee has got a raise in his/her current org recently, gets an offer from another org and then asks for the current org to match the offer What’s your first thought? Is this justified? 90% of orgs will label them as opportunistic, money hungry & capital centric. But let’s get brutally honest here: Is the talent wrong to ask for more? We’re quick to jump to conclusions and slap on those labels. But have you ever stopped to consider their perspective? They are leveraging their value in the market. They are pushing for what they believe they’re worth. Isn’t that exactly what we teach about knowing your value and not settling? Are we really being fair when we default to calling them greedy? How many of you would really go back to hard, clear benchmarking and justify why this ask is justified? How many of you are really fighting this battle of moving a godzilla out of their position (in this case, a manager) who just says, "Nai yaar... pagal hai kya... bolo same salary pe aane ke liye... abhi to raise mila hai"? Most likely (as it is today) that this will result in a no-go from a manager or a comp approval request. And when it does - you can go all gaga on how you sold opportunity cost, how you justified the value the candidate brings to the table and all that verbatim in my head translates to CONVENIENCE. Someones convenience. This will always labelled "outlier" case. {continued in comments}