U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment > Job Search
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-02-2013, 10:26 AM
 
1,480 posts, read 2,303,176 times
Reputation: 1611

Advertisements

In my job hunting support group, everyone likes to complain about how they have to get past those "idiots in Human Resources" before a mid sized or large company will consider them for employment.

They say it would be so much better if a company would just fire those "HR idiots" and all the resumes submitted would just go straight to the mgr who would be in a better position to screen and interview candidates speeding up the process.

The employment expert, who runs the group, is not in Human Resources, but said that approach would be impractical in mid sized or larger companies with up to a 1000 applicants per opening. (Especially considering most applicants come via an online employment site, are unqualified and there is government reporting, internal applicants, complex hiring procedures and EEO considerations.

Are you a manager in a larger company? Would you prefer to just handle all aspects of the recruiting process for your job openings yourself and eliminate recruiters and HR? FROM A MANAGERS PERSPECTIVE, would this be effective and efficient? Your thoughts please!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-02-2013, 10:36 AM
 
6,993 posts, read 9,537,119 times
Reputation: 2957
Yes, from the hiring manager's perspective, it would be effective and efficient.

From the company's perspective, it's better to cast a wider net and that is where you need HR. That way, you can create a workforce with a diverse set of personalities and character types which provides for a better exchange of ideas as well as leaving less stones unturned.

The problem is that there are HR people who are clueless about a company's talent requirements but I find that HR people in GE, IBM and the investment banks tend to be reliable parties in the recruitment process.

It's better to create a stronger and more engaged HR department than cutting it off entirely.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 10:44 AM
 
1,480 posts, read 2,303,176 times
Reputation: 1611
I would like to eliminate the "idiots in Human Resources" from the process but if the HR Staff who were responsible for recruitment were well trained and talented at sourcing a wide variety of talent, knew the applicant tracking software to screen the 1000 applicants, could screen out the crazies with passible resumes during a phone screen, and could train the hiring manager on effective management and interviewing skills, then they would add value. But yes, fire the idiots in HR.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Forest_Hills_Daddy View Post
Yes, from the hiring manager's perspective, it would be effective and efficient.

From the company's perspective, it's better to cast a wider net and that is where you need HR. That way, you can create a workforce with a diverse set of personalities and character types which provides for a better exchange of ideas as well as leaving less stones unturned.

The problem is that there are HR people who are clueless about a company's talent requirements but I find that HR people in GE, IBM and the investment banks tend to be reliable parties in the recruitment process.

It's better to create a stronger and more engaged HR department than cutting it off entirely.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 10:55 AM
 
Location: Chicago area
8,794 posts, read 13,284,781 times
Reputation: 15932
I would definitely like to limit their role to sorting for basic minimum qualifications and stop their BS selection crap like psyche testing, behavioral interviewing, and other embarrassing and ineffective crap. I have had out of control HR Moderator cut: snip jerk me around to the point I've withdrawn from consideration on several occasions in a couple cases giving me writing assignments like I was a third grader.

Last edited by 7G9C4J2; 12-07-2013 at 07:40 AM.. Reason: removed offensive term
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 11:00 AM
 
1,480 posts, read 2,303,176 times
Reputation: 1611
PLEASE!! I am only asking this question from a hiring managers perspective. There are plenty of other threads were applicants get to complain!

Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchemist80 View Post
I would definitely like to limit their role to sorting for basic minimum qualifications and stop their BS selection crap like psyche testing, behavioral interviewing, and other embarrassing and ineffective crap. I have had out of control HR retards jerk me around to the point I've withdrawn from consideration on several occasions in a couple cases giving me writing assignments like I was a third grader.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 11:03 AM
 
1,420 posts, read 2,636,015 times
Reputation: 2244
Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm Retired Now View Post
that approach would be impractical in mid sized or larger companies with up to a 1000 applicants per opening.
How in the heck is the hiring manager going to get around this? Do you want your expensive, talented managers




and other expensive personnel doing what HR can do for the most part?



A hiring manager making six figs plus needs those HR bimbos to weed out the 950 applications that would be of no interest to him.

Attached Thumbnails
Would it better better for the Hiring Manager if Human Resources weren't part of the hiring process?-manager.jpg   Would it better better for the Hiring Manager if Human Resources weren't part of the hiring process?-bimbos.jpg  

Last edited by Cheektowaga_Chester; 12-02-2013 at 11:12 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 11:12 AM
 
Location: FROM Dixie, but IN SoCal
3,491 posts, read 5,522,632 times
Reputation: 3751
Good points, all.

Recognize that HR has a two-fold company-vital role to play -- (a) employing the most focused and cost-effective means for targeted and unbiased recruiting, and (b) making sure that y'all don't get your collective as-pirations sued off for violating federal, state, local and company regulations/policies/procedures. If you don't know this already, you really should -- as a hiring manager, you have some PERSONAL liability should you violate certain federal/state/local regulations. In other words, a plaintiff can sue you personally and, if they win, can come straight after your personal assets. Generally speaking, as long as you have followed established company policies/procedures/practices, you are covered under the company's umbrella. However, if you haven't...

Now, to go back to the problems detailed here. As stated, they derive entirely from "a lack of partnership" between HR and the hiring managers/organizations. The blame goes both ways - onto HR and onto the hiring managers/organizations. Hiring managers -- just remember that, when you point the finger (any finger) at HR, there are still three fingers pointing straight back at you.

Regards,

-- Nighteyes (who spent better than 25 years consulting in this arena)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 11:24 AM
 
Location: Chicago area
8,794 posts, read 13,284,781 times
Reputation: 15932


[bimbo #2] does a t-test use green or black tea?

And these people are much better equipped to select the best scientist for your critical project out of 1000 resumes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 11:33 AM
 
2,080 posts, read 1,856,307 times
Reputation: 2680
I wouldn't eliminate it but there needs to be a much stronger HR that doesn't cherrypick candidates.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2013, 11:37 AM
 
1,728 posts, read 3,045,493 times
Reputation: 1052
As an IT contractor I dont deal with HR ever. My coworkers who are permanent employees also did not deal with HR except the onboarding process. It looks like they only interfere with low level employees
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment > Job Search
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top