For at least a decade now US Bank has been in need of actual pro-disciplinary policies. Current HR policies are enabling their retention of bad employees. Evidence and documentation no longer hold any value when attempting to discipline and or terminate bad employees. If the managing committee or higher-ups in human resources are reading this, people leaders in this corporation need better support from human resources when it comes to dealing with employees who are clearly taken advantage of company and federal policies. I understand this company wants to be lean. Let us use the tools that we have get rid of the dead weight.
8 replies (most recent on top)
Your mistake is the belief that HR exists to advocate or help employees in the first place. HR is there to protect the company from legal liability, financial loss, and reputational damage, not to advocate for employees or work for their well being. Occasionally, the interests of the employee and the employer align, but for the most part, HR is not our friend. I mean the department is called human resources for goodness sake. You are an asset to be managed. Help isn't coming from within.
@OP They won't let our manager get rid of an aweful employee that any other company would fire immediately! HR and legal don't give a F about employees, they are only here to protect the bank. Bank policies are not enforced and not worth the paper they are printed on. The weight of all these issues has caused us to have 7 different HR reps in just a short amount of time.
Most of the time it’s not the HR leaders holding you back, it’s the legal department.
This group of HR that was installed on the top we have right now is the most anti-employee group I’ve ever seen in my entire professional career. They are sick.
These practices have often been used by managers as a form of retaliation against employees who speak up, ask questions, or challenge ideas when it’s warranted. In some cases, the process has also been misused to shift blame onto direct reports, particularly when conflicts arise or when individuals don’t align with internal politics or informal hierarchies within the organization (e.g. golf bros, tech bros, caste system). Given the bank’s current culture, it raises a broader question: what meaningful incentive is there for employees to consistently do their best work?
Original poster is 100% correct. Why won’t HR let people leaders get rid of our problem employees? What does it take?
The managing committee is OK with lax ethics, just look at the head of risk, the one place that SHOULD have solid ethics. You name it, she’s done it.
It feels like you're only here to fill a quota a DEI Hire, and you never stop complaining about DEI importance and blame every one to call action on HR