Nice to know that HR is hiring a Sr recruiter when they are not busy laying off good people. Probably need to staff up the HR Team to lay people off faster and bring in cover up teams for the bungling VP HR
6 replies (most recent on top)
@k4 from the neck up, attractive. A bit thin for my tastes otherwise and obsessed with that according to a reliable source, early adopter of GLP-1’s before it was a rank-and-file thing. Already thin and got thinner. Painfully so.
I guess it’s the way the Scotsman liked it! 😂😂😂. Anything for her at-work husband!
@gv SR was a smoke show though
@OP you sure the HR hire isn’t a female one at Executive level? In that way they’d have someone else around for KM (or the only other ELT member with his ELT tenure, given this person has long had the same proclivities) to chase around at work when he (they) have their next mid-life crisis now that SR has been gone a couple of years. 🙄🙄🙄.
(To he-l with the massive agency issues that this sordid behavior creates particularly in the midst of constant reorganization; if it feels good, do it!!!! (but only if you are on the ELT; grounds for termination if it’s anyone else)).
They used to be involved onsite, and then with the org changes for BT, and they became totally useless. Literally refuse to even answer questions, they direct you straight to HR connect, won't even help with hiring. Not sure why we have any HR onsite at all.
In all honesty, HR has very little involvement at our refinery. It’s a stark, positive contrast to my previous employer where they had to be involved in every personnel decision and sit in on every interview.
Time to let go 90% of HR All you need is someone to take care of payroll issues and VTO issues. It can even be a part time role tied to someone’s other duties in smaller organizations.
HR, as a department, is going to justify its own existence by complicating the rest of the business to create a need. They create processes that have to be followed so they have a job managing them. Churn.