NBC and poor HR practices

For once I will stray from my typical rants regarding Rob Ford (not that media blackouts and the illegal purchase of municipal land are boring) and the TTC (not that rampant absenteeism and financial irregularities fail to interest) and talk about TV. Mostly because I am both tired of looking at how my city is handling itself, and because sometimes an employer commits such a public faux-pas that it's impossible to think of anything else.

NBC has been known for making fairly poor decisions, and is mostly considered to be justly last in American networks. Since many of my favorite shows air on the peakcock, I was inclined to disagree, but no more. Community is a show, for those who don't know, that has been airing since 2009 when it was created by writer and producer Dan Harmon. He has been in the news quite a bit in the past few months for missteps such as publicizing private voicemails from actors on the show, rumors circulating that he was failing to finish scripts on time, and threw tantrums on set to get his way. It seems the network has decided that they'd had enough, and the value his creative mind generated presumably was outweighed by his behaviour. Whether this is the case or not really isn't relevant here, nor do I feel I know enough about the situation to comment one way or the other (though as a fan, I fear change).

The issue at hand is how he was terminated. Technically, as a writer/producer he was on contract, and that contract expired. They were under no obligation to renew (though the assumption is that if you continue a project, you will keep the driving force behind it) and, it seems, already had a couple of people lined up for the position. They released a press release indicating the new showrunners, suggesting that Mr. Harmon would take on a consulting role, and that, prior to the internet, would have been the end of it. Mr. Harmon posted on his tumbler later that night that he had received no communications from NBC, nor did he agree to any substitute position with the show. Since there had been no indication that he would be removed from his position (even with all the errors in judgement), to terminate a working relationship through the media seems unethical to me. Not only does it disrespect the employee, but it affects the morale of everyone at the company, who now know that their jobs are on the line even if they are not aware of it - perhaps tomorrow they will open the newspaper and their name will be there as an ex-employee. Such poor judgement at the top level can put an entire department at risk as stakeholders lose faith in the project's ability. Where was the HR department to put a stop to this nonsensical level of theatrics before the axe was dropped?

The reaction has been fairly distinct. Fans of the show have panned the decision, TV critics have noted that the decision to continue a creative experiment without the creator was an exercise doomed to fail, and employees have reached out in sympathy. It seems quite a few of the writers will also be moving on, perhaps to an employer that will offer them a little more respect.

While what they did was not illegal, it was downright distasteful, and shines a bad light on everyone involved. Discretion in such situations is paramount, and it is a lesson that NBC and Sony are now being forced to learn through the public lynching they face.

On a side note, if you have not seen this show yet, I suggest you take the time. You will not regret it.


#sixseasonsandamovie

Rob Ford and Ethics, a story of two things that do not mix

As a lover of Human Resources, and a true believer in the importance of the protection of the law, especially when it comes to possible victims (such as employees) who may be taken advantage of by those with greater authority, the past year has been very difficult. While I have always been a vocal opponent of Rob Ford, even I was stunned when he fired TC chief general manager Gary Webster, at great cost to the City, for providing an expert opinion in a subject he is well versed in. Of course, this is not newsworthy anymore. He was replaced by someone presumably more amiable to the idea of siding with the boss no matter what. Of course, even he hasn't publicly supported Ford outside of a comment suggesting that Toronto will still a long term subway plan, especially for the busy downtown core (a statement I don't think would meet with great disagreement).


This, I find, is the best illustration for the two elements which make Ford a terrible employer. (a) He violates the law by terminating good employees without cause, (b) he doesn't seem to recruit correctly, as he has consistently found his hires to fall short of his expectations. That is the quintessential bad boss - can't retain good people, and can't hire effectively (in this case, "effectively" would mean finding the Yes Men he's looking for).


Certainly, there has been growing animosity between the Commission and its users, fortunately since the reign of Ford began, we have seen a slow shift of that animosity towards his administration, and Councillors from the suburbs (who would doubtfully ever replace their gas guzzlers with a metropass) who are attempting to dictate how those within the city will travel. His lack of ethics, complete disregard for the rule of law, and manipulation of government contracts to profit his family have done the impossible - they have boosted public opinion of unions and public sector employees.


Perhaps some good can come of this yet?

Karen Stintz's Stint on Undercover Boss Canada

I know I've been harping on this topic a bit heavily, but it's my blog so if you don't like it go away.

Earlier today I finally caught the Undercover Boss episode featuring our TTC warrior Karen Stinz in her battle to find a balance between Rob Ford's lunatic 10% budget cuts and a public that loathes them by getting to know how things are run on the front line.

Fantastic idea. Especially in what I like to call a post-99% world, where there is an increasing anger from people in the bottom of organizations at the lack of real knowledge their higher ups possess in what it actually takes to make the company run (as opposed to the theoretical/strategic/etc), the idea to go under cover and gain perspective, knowledge from the trenches, and a well rounded view of your organization is excellent.

Of course, praise is rarely worth a blog post, so here's my but. Granted, Karen detailed that the reason she selected work in maintenance as the primary areas of undercover work is that that is where she was hoping to find some ideas of saving costs without harming the services they offer. She worked assisting the cleaning staff, reupholstering, servicing buses and one day in a subway train. She said the number one complaints she gets are that the trains and buses and dirty. I find that difficult to believe.

My issue with the way this was conducted is that it was quite clearly done in such a way as to avoid the actual hot button issues, and then conclude that the reason the public is angry is because the media tells them to. I have never seen a maintenance worker featured in an article on poor TTC staff. In fact, the only time I ever heard mention of them was when the drivers at the TTC were able to secure raises for themselves at the expense of wage increases for maintenance staff after the last threat of strike.

I am deeply offended that Karen's conclusion was not that there were serious customer service... Let's call them areas of opportunity, because she met 5 of the very best employees on the TTC (they knew it was going to be televised, meaning they'd have chosen the best employees, who would have been on their best behaviour), but just that - clearly - the media has been brainwashing the imbeciles and degenerates that apparently use her system. It's not that many drivers and administrative staff are rude and incompetent (see previous blog posts for evidence of this), it's just the public's fault, because we apparently love killing ourselves on the tracks.

Yes, some people are disgusting and will urinate on the stations. Some people are rude and they even showed a customer who spit on a driver as she was exiting the bus. Of course, one thing I learned from the pepper spray incident in the US late last year, is that editing is very important to the message, and as a result of personal experience, I would be very curious as to what the driver did that made this woman so angry (NOT that I justify her actions).

My question is this, are Torontonians stupider than other transit users, such as in NY, Tokyo, or Moscow? Are we dirtier? Ruder? More violent? Are we more likely to slash seats? In my travels, I learned that the answer is most likely no. The question which follows is then, why do we have to accept a subpar transit system when compared with these other international cities? In the 70's, we had an amazing, well functioning, and clean subway. New York had a dirty and dangerous laughingstock. How is it that they have been able to reverse this, while we deteriorated? Why is it that in Tokyo it is unacceptable for a train to be 1 minute late, and here, I am yelled at for asking an operator if there is a delay when the signs say 15 minutes to the next train. Am I also being manipulated by the media to think that just because virtually every experience I have had in the last 2 years with ANY member of the TTC family has been at best neutral and at worst costly and frustrating? How about the fact that this whole customer service media nightmare of theirs started not with the media, but with a single photo posted on a blog of an operator sleeping on the job?

I guess we're just wrong, stupid, and malleable by the malevolent "media". No trouble here, folks, just a few million confused citizens. So much for this being a learning opportunity, just a well organized photo op.

City Hall vs. the employees

In a shocking(!!) turn of events, Rob Ford's cronies strong-armed the Union into accepting reduced job stability. Readers of this blog know that I do not enthusiastically nor unconditionally support unions, and have said on a couple of occasions that they need to reassess their function to remain relevant.

Having said that, employees being taken advantage of by a belligerent and malicious employer who has proven time and time again to be ignorant of the law and disrespectful of it is absolutely and unequivocally unacceptable.

The Ford steamroller has paved a new road for negotiations with unions by first taking down CUPE Local 416 and their unreasonable demands to maintain job security in a weak economy - even over pay increase (which would save the City money).

This is just the latest in his HR gaffs. Though I suppose his biggest gaffe was hiring someone competent to head the TTC - someone not willing to follow the tagline of the day and collect her paycheck but indeed wants to improve conditions for Torontonians by stopping the Ford-made underground gravy train. People do sometimes forget that a political figure such as Mr. Ford is also a manager, and with such a title comes great responsibility. To be a great Mayor you need the same qualities as a great boss - listen to your subordinates, they may have some good ideas; respect your employees (and shareholders!); and absolutely most importantly of all - keep your ego in check, because when it's out of control it makes you and your company/city look like fools.

Since being elected, he has successfully alienated many on his own team (another reflection of poor management - even the top dogs at the now disgraced Goldman Sachs had a strong core team of supporters). In fact, even the Ontario Conservatives have distanced themselves from his message. He has also managed to alienate neighboring businesses, with Mississauga Mayor Hazel McCallion threatening to go after City Hall if the new transit plan intrudes on her own plans for developing transit in the West end.

Just as Premier Mike Harris did before him, Mr. Ford is poised to leave behind a legacy of short-term decisions designed to support his allies and family-owned companies while leaving Toronto's vibrant community to pay for the increased tension between the Public and public employees, reduction in job security and quality of life (even if you drive, since one of the proposals would add tolls to Toronto roads to pay for the subway extension). We have yet to bring Ontario's standards up to pre-Harris era in terms of funding for education, health care, and public transit, and continue to pay for his costly decision to amalgamate the GTA (a direct cause to Ford's election). It seems we will now spend the next two decades digging ourselves out of the hole Mr. Ford is digging us into.

Bottom line - short sighted managers will lose their best employees, the loyalty of their staff, and the trust of their stakeholders. I do not expect to see Mr. Ford return after the next election, but I suspect he will continue to "manage" employees in the same negative and demotivating way.

The TTC and their HR woes

I have been holding my tongue about the TTC for a while, so I've decided I can throw in another rant. If you've read my previous TTC rants, you know I feel their bottom line issue is their industrial relations. Their Union has far too much power, and has pretty much dictated where every new cent goes - higher wages for people with a high school degree and a driving license to be able to make $75,000 driving a bus/train, often poorly, and sometimes under the influence of things that lead to passengers dying.

In February I signed up for the MDP program. Through this, I could get the metropass 10 bucks off, so long as I agree to buy one every single month. The added bonus is that they mail it to you at least a week in advance, so no need to even get it, and you either pay for the whole year in advance or they charge you monthly. Over the past 8 months, I have learned that there is a special section in hell dedicated to the incompetent and rude people that seem to be specially picked out to work in this program, which is really something when one knows my already low opinion of most employed there.

When we came down to submit the application, we had a member of their team help us complete it and vet it for correctness. We used 2 tokens to get down there. The next day, we get a call that the form was completed incorrectly, and that we'd have to return to complete it again. Two more tokens. The end of the month came, and no metropass. We call. We are told that because the form was completed incorrectly the first time, it was set to pick up only, and when we completed it correctly someone must have forgotten to remove that limit from the system. We have to come pick it up. Two more tokens.

Two months later, the postal services stop. They say they'll have a driver deliver it, we just need to be home to get it. We stay home Monday. No metropass. Teusday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday all pass without delivery. We call every day, and are told it would either be there tomorrow or the day after. We ask if they think we're unemployed that we can just sit around at home all day. Our concerns are ignored. Friday, we go down there, and spend an hour yelling at their staff, who assure us it'll arrive between Monday and Wednesday. After filing a formal complaint and refusing to leave, we are given the metropass with reluctance. No one even attempts to acquiesce us, they just give us the product we have already paid for as a favor. Thanks, guys.

Last month, we moved. Due to exceptional circumstances, we didn't know where to until October 6th or so. Once we moved, called their office to inform them of our new address, a couple of weeks before they're supposed to send out the metropasses. We said if it was too late to change it in the system, we would be happy to come pick it up. The result was another rude employee, telling us the cut off for address changes is the 5th, and then it goes to a different department. "Why can't you just not send it then?" That's the other department, we're told. "Ok, transfer us to that department." They don't take calls from the public, we're told. The metropass will be sent, to the wrong address, and there is nothing we can do about it. We went back there to check every day, but of course, it was not there. Either thrown out or stolen, who knows. As a result, I had to purchase a new November metropass. Another formal complaint is filed.

To sum up, every single person working there, and we've dealt with MANY, is rude and incompetent. They have no ability to perform anything beyond the simple task of signing you up, which they do poorly, or changing your address, which won't help you get your metropass. Taking your money seems easy enough. As a result of their incompetence, this program, which should have saved us $100 over a year, has actually cost us $31 dollars more than just buying the passes every month from a dealer, and many hours and sleepless nights.

This office is yet another example of how the TTC management is not only a pawn of the union, but even in running the TTC they fail to develop a working hierarchy or inter-departmental communication which would help them get more people to sign up for this program (which would guarantee them income and stabilize their balance sheet) and in general be more supportive of TTC initiatives (such as requests for additional funding from the government, or wage increases for their employees).

To be honest, this program has made me lose faith in the TTC's ability to perform in their current set up. I used to be their greatest supporter, and now I resent having to use the system. At this point, they need to either restructure the entire system, force funds into maintenance (Especially for the new train, which seems to break down every time I use it), or they need to be sold to a private organization who knows how to operate a billion dollar business. It is of no surprise to me that every single economic survey done of Toronto says the same thing - great city, but your public transit is terrible and expensive.

Time to change that, with HR - and if they can't, with a sale.

Work and loss

A few days ago, a close member of my family passed on. She was 11 years old (but nearly 80 in human years). It has been a difficult few days, but nonetheless, my mind connects this to HR (coping mechanism?).

I am fortunate enough to have a job I can do from home, and an understanding group of coworkers, so I was able to stay home rather than having to deal with these news in the office. However, if you are an hourly employee, work in emergency services, or have an un-sympathetic boss, coping with loss may become extremely difficult. As such, I've complied a small list of resources and basic rules that govern how employees who have lost someone (or about to) must be treated, and what rights you have.

If you have a (close) family member who is suffering from a terminal illness, section 49.2 of the Employment Standards Act allows you to take up to 8 (unpaid) weeks to care for them. Note that a week is Sunday to Saturday, not necessarily a standard work week for you. It is also important to note that, if requested, you would need to provide proof that the family member's illness must be at a severity level "with a significant risk of death occurring within a period of 26 weeks or such shorter period". Very sensitive. It also stipulates that once that person passes, you must return to work the week after (e.g. if they passed Saturday, you're back at work Sunday, even if you had another week or two left in the leave). However, if they do not pass during the leave, but the illness continues, you may be permitted a second leave.

Note that the request needs to be made in writing, but interestingly, there is no minimum on the number of employees the company must have before this rule comes into effect.

Another option is the Personal Emergency Leave (section 50.1). This applies if you or a family member (including children-in-law) have been injured or killed. There is a maximum of 10 days you can take off in this instance, and the company must have at least 50 people for this type of option to become available. You'll also need to provide proof of the need for a leave.

Other that these, you're essentially out of luck. If you have vacation time you can use that, but conversely, I would advise informing your superior of the situation and see if they're willing to help. I know I've worked in places where I would not be eligible for these ESA rights, but at the end of the day most employers know they won't get much out of you for a little while, so a fair deal can often be struck.

As for me, I'm just lucky my boss has a dog, too.

 Poochini

RIP

2000-2011

the difference between American and Canadian Employment law

There are, of course, many differences between the way the two countries deal with the employment relationship. However, those can all be boiled down to perspective. Since America, even through this self-created economic turmoil, believes in the invisible hand of the market, which given enough time will correct all wrongs, it stands to reason that they would not look too kindly at regulating the interaction between employees and employers. Why should an employee need rights? If an employer treats them badly, they will leave, and find work elsewhere. The invisible hand works. Canada, on the other hand, believes that there are minimum standards that ALL workplaces should meet, and any attempt to circumvent these is generally seen in bad faith and punished.

As such, there are no such things as implied work contracts in America. Unless it specifies a time line in the employment contract (should the employee sign one), it is assumed that the relationship is brand new from one moment to the next, and that unless basic human rights are violated in easily traceable ways,  the invisible hand will be the only judge of whether a company's hiring/employing/terminating employees is competitive. After all, a good candidate can pretty much write their own checks, right?

Canadian law assumes that once a working relationship has started, the employee and employer immediately have certain rights, even if no contract is signed. They have a right to a reasonable amount of honesty from each other (e.g. don't lie on a resume or about how many hours are expected). They have a reasonable expectation of mutual respect, of vacation time, of not abusing drugs in the workplace, etc etc. Common sense things that essentially have been deemed by courts to be so fundamental to any employment relationship, that even if a contract was signed without any of these clauses in it, it will be implied that both parties wanted the clause in there, they just forgot or something.

Having this difference makes a huge impact on the relationship because for one, a Canadian employee doesn't have to worry about arbitrarily being fired any day they walk into the workplace. They're not immune, but if they employer doesn't have a good reason, at least you'll be compensated. It also levels the power balance between the board room and the assembly line, and since the invisible hand seems to forget itself when the economy slows and jobs are few and far in between, its nice to have a back up - just in case.