If I could write an inscription for the HR Statue of Liberty it would read:
Give me your angry, your frustrated,
Your livid executives, yearning to breathe free of,
The wretched refuse of your performance systems,
Send these, the passionate, self-righteous senior leaders,
I raise my emotional walls to quell your drama.
Who teaches HR on how to deal with conflict? I may be dated but it was not in my course material! Much of what I learned was either the hard way, watching others strategize or from reading!
Key learning for me was: “Don’t take the bait!” Getting angry or annoyed leads to loss of impulse control which just seems to unleash the feeding frenzy and ratchet up the drama. Not recommended!
On the other hand staying calm and repeating back the facts without the “f*#)ing idiot” and other colourful adjectives generally helped me focus enough to figure out what really was the problem.
I’ve also learned that staring blankly at someone who is frothing at the mouth is not well received. Somehow no reaction means the story and frothing must be repeated another 6 times since I obviously don’t hear very well. That ever happen to you? Even if I fail to see the issue, because there is none, I must still nod and listen with empathy. “Yes, I can see that really upset you.”
Our magic is really heading off the conflict before it even occurs. Like the Poirot mystery where he must solve a crime that has not yet happened HR comes to the rescue quite often. Keeping the peace successfully is a thankless job though. Without irritation, slamming doors and flying papers all around us our efforts seem to be invisible. Perhaps you have heard all about your “cushy” job where you can chat all day and drink coffee. Uh huh?
To work in HR is to be in the midst of endless disputes of varying magnitude. Through it all we must be professional and not allow ourselves to become jaded. Let’s give ourselves some credit for the difficult work we do. HR professionals really are the unsung heroes of conflict resolution.
Ladies and Gentlemen we are in the midst of one of the wildest NHL postseasons ever! Intensity is at an all-time high! So is scoring, so are penalties, so are suspensions, so are injuries, so is controversy… In the first round playoff series between the Philadelphia Flyers and the Pittsburgh Penguins, a series eventually won by the 2012 version of the Broad Street Bullies, the two teams tallied a record 45 goals in the first four games alone.
Analysts and insiders posited that the explosion of scoring was due in part to the reckless style of play by both teams. For example, a Pittsburgh player in his own zone would line up an opponent for a big hit against the boards, hoping to make a big impact and send a big message. He would do so at the expense of fundamentally-sound defence, and therefore give up scoring chances. Both teams strayed from the fundamentals of playing hockey, and I can’t tell you how many penalty minutes the teams amassed in this series, because my calculator only has so many digits… In short, they did not keep their sticks on the ice.
When someone tells you to “keep your stick on the ice” they are using an expression with two meanings: 1) remain alert and vigilant; 2) calm down and stick to the basics.
In workplace management, as in hockey, as in life, it is often wise to keep your stick on the ice.
You may have heard recently that a certain Police Service got itself into some hot water and bad press for requiring a job applicant to disclose their Facebook username and password during the recruitment process. In response, the Ontario Human Rights Commission has published an opinion that “Employers should not ask job applicants for access to information stored on social media or other online sites and that doing so could leave an employer open to a claim of discrimination under the Code.” A prominent and well-respected professor from York University in Toronto has publicly stated his opinion that by requiring a job applicant’s login information, and accessing their Facebook page, a prospective employer could collect information disclosing an applicant’s traits and characteristics protected by the Ontario Human Rights Code, and in the face of a complaint, would have the burden to prove that the decision not to hire was in no part based on the protected grounds of the applicant. Of course, the Commission’s stance is an opinion, and is not conclusive or necessarily binding on the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.
To say the least, this is a contentious legal issue of which even the lawyers in our firm have differing points of view. I can only speak for myself, but I understand the Commission’s opinion to state that potentially running afoul of the Code would not be due to requiring the username and password of an applicant per se, but rather actually snooping a Facebook page using the login information. Does that mean looking at a job applicant’s open Facebook profile disclosing their religious affiliation, disability, family status, and age also violates the Code if an employer cannot establish that they did not rely on such information to reject an applicant? I think that taken to its logical conclusion, the Human Rights Commission would seem to say, yes. So too then would engaging in a discussion with an acquaintance of the applicant who says “my wife is good friends with Bob’s partner Jim.” Or “Bob was going to enter the NHL draft but then he permanently injured his back.” Does an employer violate Ontario’s Human Rights Code simply by stumbling upon information regarding a protected ground in this manner? Is an employer burdened with the onus of disproving a claim of discrimination under the Human Rights Code any time they become innocently informed of an applicant’s protected characteristic? I think not, and as a lawyer, I would be interested to see the Facebook login issue argued in front of the Human Rights Tribunal.
But I highly doubt that the issue will reach that point. Why? Because employers should know to keep their sticks on the ice! For most employers, requiring an applicant to disclose their Facebook login information so you can snoop them out before (or even after) hiring strays so far from the basic principles of safe hiring practices, that it is the human resources equivalent of lining up your opponent for a big hit in your own zone, at the expense of fundamental defence. It’s a battle you could potentially win, but weigh the potential benefits against the potential costs and you’ll see it’s just a bad idea. High risk, low reward.
Keep your stick on the ice!
If I’m right and requiring a job applicant to disclose their username and password is not, strictly speaking, a violation of human rights law, it would still likely constitute a breach of privacy law that could result in a complaint to the federal or provincial Privacy Commissioner, or at least make the employer seem intrusive and overbearing. There are other, less risky means by which an employer can keep its stick on the ice and still achieve the same goal of ensuring they are hiring an acceptable candidate.
Employers ought to be aware that they can safely comply with Human Rights legislation by carrying out their accessible and fair hiring process, extend an offer of employment to the suitable candidate, and in appropriate circumstances make the offer of employment conditional on such further terms as receipt of references, background checks, or medical clearance for a physically demanding job, etc.
So when your company is hiring, keep your stick on the ice. Be guided by proper hiring practices, respect your applicants, and when in doubt, talk to your lawyer before taking unnecessary risks.
Last summer, John and I rescued an enormous bouncing golden retriever named Marley. We found him through a rescue organization on the website petfinder.com. We thought he was perfect because he came from Ohio near where John grew up.
I have a pretty soft spot for pets and was moved by Marley’s story–or more aptly, his lack of one.
We did have some information about him. We knew he was someone’s Christmas present based upon his purchase receipt. We knew he was not exercised based on his size. He knew no commands. Based upon his instant fixation on us as “the ones” we knew he was the kind of dog that truly needed love and affection.
Sadly too, we discovered that he was likely mistreated in that he reacts very poorly to correction.
My experience with dogs has had an impact on my career and there are many things about raising dogs that can apply to people and the workplace. We have another dog, Daphne, who is in her own way a piece of work. In her case I blame myself partly for her failings. I was young and childless and I did not understand how quickly bad habits stick, especially in stubborn dogs. By the time I tried to undo what I had done, like let her cry in the car or bark at the mailman, it was too late to fix it.
The fact that Mars was two when he joined our menagerie has presented even bigger challenges. We didn’t know his rules and he didn’t know how to tell us the rules he knew.
So, I failed with him too. He tugged so hard on my heart strings that I came to accept that I would share my pillow with him at night and wake up every morning with him standing over me with his nose sniffing my breath. Also when he is excited he steals my dishtowels and moves shoes around. In most houses, these things would not be acceptable.
The same thing can be said for workplaces. If I had stuck to this sort of plan with Marley’s orientation as is advised below, things could be perfect:
- Provide an orientation immediately. The sooner someone knows the boundaries the better. While HR is not the enforcer, there is some obligation we have to help people start off right. It is like dog poop, you can keep walking by it without scooping it, saying “that’s not my job!”, but then you have to keep looking at and smelling the poop.
- Positively reward good behaviour early and frequently. Eventually you can cool it, but even a few kind words will do wonders to create a high functioning employee.
- Use games and quizzes to reinforce what you want to stick. Being able to demonstrate competence early is a good tool to building a great employee.
- Stress the value of the team. In Marley’s case he had a new sister with a bruised ego to deal with. Good integration depends upon communication, clarity and connection. Help others to find common ground.
- Make it fun! People need to feel early that they’ve made a wise career investment by coming to the company. With Marley we wanted him to feel like the bad times were over and that he had found his new home. This meant that he got to go hiking and experience a much bigger world than we think we had in his earlier life. Whenever he wants to go on one of these hikes, he brings us our shoes!
Ultimately the point is you receive to the extent you invest. All is well in our home even if we did not do this perfectly. It is a reminder though of the value in consistency.
