Disposable Job Applicants: Today’s Dehumanizing Recruiting Practices

The three biggest lies in the world are: “the check is in the mail,” “I’m from the government and I’m here to help” and when recruiters tell you “we’ll get back to you.”The dehumanizing recruiting practices that recruiters and/or human resources (HR) professionals employ these days are downright reptilian in nature. Now that the gig economy has produced an endless supply of desperate job seekers, job applicants are disposable.

Call me...maybe??? Not reptilian recruiters
Call me…maybe??? Don’t expect a response from a reptilian recruiter.

I addressed this unfortunate trend in my first post for this blog last year and it looks as if things have gotten even worse. It doesn’t matter if you do a preliminary phone interview or if you’re called back for multiple face-to-face interviews and are a runner-up for a position, the odds that a recruiter or HR contact will get back to you if you aren’t chosen for a job are slim to none. And don’t even think about asking for feedback as to why you weren’t hired; they can’t be bothered.

I had an experience with Deutsche Bank a while back that made my blood boil. Their recruiter found me on LinkedIn and, after a preliminary phone interview went well, I was asked to come in for a face-to-face interview with a handful of people who interacted with the position they sought to fill.

I was asked to come in two more times to meet more people and then…nothing…no call or email thanking me for my time and informing me that they hired someone else. After getting the big rush, I found myself getting the bum’s rush.

I emailed the recruiter weeks later and got a curt response saying that I didn’t get the job (which I already knew), and she completely ignored my request for feedback; I wanted to know why, after being brought in numerous times to meet an army of people, I wasn’t chosen.

That feedback can be helpful when interviewing for future positions. This was a courtesy that HR recruiters (back when they were known as personnel department staff) readily provided. Besides, I didn’t even apply for the job; they sought me out, so how dare they blow me off?

I went out of my way to accommodate them, despite the expense involved with multiple interviews (commuting, wardrobe, portfolio material, etc.). You can barely afford these expenses when you’re unemployed.

Return to sender: applicant unknown

More recently, I was contacted by a former employer who seemed eager to bring me back into the fold; I had had some success with the company a few years back and still had some friends there, so I was excited about the possibility of going back. After a phone interview that went well, the hiring manager seemed eager for me to come in the very next day for a face-to-face interview with his VP.

Inevitably, he couldn’t make it happen, because they were planning to leave on a two week tour of the company’s facilities the day after and they were super busy. I wasn’t surprised they couldn’t make the meeting happen, but I assumed we would reconnect when they returned.

It’s been five weeks and I’m still waiting. I sent the hiring manager a LinkedIn message more than a week ago and he hasn’t responded. I have no idea if they decided not to fill the job (it was a newly created position), or if someone internally didn’t want to rehire me or if they found someone cheaper. At this point, I guess I’ll never know.

This scenario plays out over and over. I’m at the point where I don’t trust any “good” interviews anymore. I’m not alone; my friends tell me they are experiencing this phenomena, as well. There’s simply no follow-through anymore. If you aren’t selected for a job, you’re expected to just vaporize, no questions asked.

You can get whiplash from this type of interaction. No wonder record numbers of people have stopped looking for work; who has the stomach for this type of abuse? When you lose your job and struggle to find work, you’re already operating with a diminished self-esteem. Being disposed of in such an inhumane manner can destroy what little mojo you have left.

A message to recruiters

Here’s the thing: it’s not okay. So what if you have hundreds of candidates to choose from? Your Applicant Tracking System (ATS) bots do most of the work for you, anyway. If you reach out to a handful of prospects and take up their time (and money) with phone, Skype or in-person interviews, your job doesn’t end if the hiring manager doesn’t choose them for the job.

Call or email them and let them know they didn’t get the job and, if possible, why. It’s not that hard to do, or time consuming…and it’s the right thing to do. Karma can be a bitch, you know. And in this gig economy,  if this is how you roll, it’s highly likely that someday soon you will be the one waiting for a call or email that will never come.

Carly Fiorina: From HP Board Meetings to Iowa Bored Meetings

Carly Fiorina’s hapless bid for the presidency should serve as a warning to all self-important corporate executives: Your hubris may not play in Peoria…or Des Moines, Iowa. The exception, of course, is Donald Trump…but then again, Trump didn’t need to slide on his belly, kneecapping smarter coworkers out of his way on his climb to the top; his daddy handed him a successful real estate empire.Carly Fiorina's Presidential Run

After making her mark at AT&T by plowing through a (probably small) crowd of female wannabe executives (from secretary to CEO!!!), Carly Fiorina was tapped to lead Hewlett-Packard (HP) in 1999. Her bipolar self-importance, coupled with her intense, ferret-like gaze, allowed her to become an extremely well-compensated poster girl for diversity in the tech industry. How cool was she to head a company in an industry dominated by men?

Six short years and many bad (often heartless) decisions later (the Compaq acquisition and her penchant for outsourcing everyone and everything top the list), she flushed away 50 percent of the company’s value and 30,000 jobs. In the end, Carly’s greatest achievement at HP was her resignation; the stock shot up 7 percent when she announced she was leaving the company.

This former tech “mogul” didn’t even have the common sense to purchase her own domain name. Instead, one of the many former HP workers that she displaced snatched up carlyfiorina.org and used the site to mock Carly and expose the extent of her relentless need to destroy jobs…in her own words. For example, after being asked how she would handle the layoffs at HP if she had to do it again, she replied: “I would have done them all faster.” O-kay.

Carly has been running for office (and losing) ever since, trying to regain a large canvas on which to paint her human carnage. Such pluck is admired by corporate board members who love putting tenacious, self-centered people in charge of companies…people who don’t mind getting a little (or a lot of) blood on their hands to achieve “economies of scale,” but in the real world, people like Carly are rightly shunned for being the psychopaths that they are.

After a career of failure, scandal, and a complete lack of empathy for the people whose lives she carelessly destroyed as HP’s CEO, politics beckoned. As a former corporate CEO, she didn’t feel the need to start at the bottom, so she ran for senator of California against the Yoda of female politicians, Barbara Boxer (who quickly schooled the “secretary-to-CEO” upstart). And now she wants to fail up to president and become the Republican Party’s Hillary Clinton. Such hubris. The Onion humorously captured her delusional aspirations, as only they can.

I suppose it’s easy to think you’re the cat’s pajamas when you spend years addressing a captive audience of employees who applaud and laugh at your bad jokes at town hall meetings. Still, there’s a big difference between addressing an audience of employees who depend on your approval to keep their jobs and addressing American voters, such as those at the Iowa caucuses this week, who you have to depend on to get the job.

Like all bipolar CEOs, when she does face rejection, she folds like a cheap suit. After a poor showing at the Iowa caucuses, she skipped town and her own party. No need to thank the few people who worked on her behalf; it was time to move on and be a world leader pretend at the next stop on the campaign trail…the New Hampshire primary.

Carly, like Hillary Clinton, are examples of what is wrong with too many women who achieve power. As a woman myself, I have to admit that I preferred working for men. Many of the women I worked for who had high aspirations viewed me as a threat (even though I never shared their C-suite aspirations) and felt it necessary to neutralize my contributions or even to take credit for my occasional good ideas. I can honestly say that I have inadvertently helped a lot of these women move up that coveted ladder without so much as a thank you from them.

I wish I could say that all women leaders are wise, gentle souls who have an innate desire to better the world and nurture the growth and development of other women, but that hasn’t been my experience. I can’t imagine what Carly did to her female coworkers during her meteoric rise up the corporate ladder at AT&T.

On some level, you have to blame the environment…with so few opportunities for women to break through the glass ceiling, I can see how an ambitious woman can turn into a psychopath trying to squeeze through the eye of the needle of achievement. Still, until we can level the corporate and political playing fields and the Lady Macbeth syndrome becomes the exception and not the rule, voters (and employees) need to proceed with caution.

This is the problem I have with identity politics. I’d love to see a woman become president (I wish Elizabeth Warren had decided to run), but I don’t support voting for a powerful woman just because she’s a woman. Hillary Clinton and Carly Fiorina are flawed, power-hungry, mentally ill women. And the reality is that after a life time of stepping on other women to get ahead, well…they don’t like other women, so why give them your vote, ladies? Neither would make a suitable first female president and it troubles me that so many women are blinded by ovaries wrapped in a power suit.

While it’s easy to single out Fiorina as a narcissistic, psychotic product of corporate dysfunction, the reality is that C-suites at companies nationwide are filled with Carly Fiorinas and even more bipolar or psychologically damaged men.

I wonder how different the corporate landscape would be if leaders were selected by employees, instead of by corporate board members who see personnel as “human resources.” A little more humility and a lot less hubris in leadership would be appreciated.

Overqualified and Over 40: You Don’t Get What You Don’t Pay For

It’s become obvious to me that the mission statement of most mid- or large-sized companies in the U.S. is : “Know the price of everything and the value of nothing.” How else to explain the epidemic of underemployed and unemployed people over 40?

A Business Journal contributing writer recently explained why companies don’t want to hire people over 40. Below are the reasons he was given by people who hire:

If they hire an experienced, mature worker at a salary that is clearly below what he/she should earn (should being the operative word here) they’ll be gone as soon as something better comes along

Working Stiffed response: So…pay them what they should earn…duh! How much money do companies lose because of the sometimes expensive mistakes made be less experienced, “cheaper” employees? Besides, wouldn’t it make more sense to have a few mature, experienced workers around who can mentor younger talent?

For that matter, what should companies expect if they underpay anyone, young or old? Do they think people will stick around for the pleasure of their manager’s company or to admire how effectively the CEO spends all the money he/she gets to keep by underpaying their employees??? Good luck with that.

If an experienced, mature worker accepts a lower salary than he/she should be earning (should…there’s that word again) there’s probably something wrong with him/her

Working Stiffed response: There is something wrong with unemployed mature workers; they are out of work for no good reason. I’d argue that there is really something wrong with short-nearsighted hiring managers and business owners who leave valuable talent at the interview table because of greed and ageism.

Job candidates over 40 who don’t get the job may sue for age discrimination

Working Stiffed response: And they should, if that is the only reason they are not being considered for the job, but the reality is they probably won’t sue you. In an environment where unions are routinely demonized and destroyed, few workers expect to find a sympathetic ear in the courts (and recent regulations have only reinforced employer-favored outcomes).

Besides, such an action would dash any hope of finding work, and finding a job when you’re over 40 is hard enough without having a failed age discrimination lawsuit to contend with during interviews.

Companies want someone who will stay for a while, and someone over 40 might retire sooner than they want

Working Stiffed response: As best as I can tell, most companies don’t want people to stick around, unless they’re young, cheap and don’t screw up too much. If a business is sincerely looking for long-term employees, they should prefer generation-Xers and baby boomers; they are more inclined to stick around and work hard, if they can land a decent job where they are appreciated.

Most millennials will tell you that they are not obsessed with money and they also don’t want to spend up to 80 hours a week trapped in an office. Thanks to all the zombie, vampire and doomsday scenario entertainment they grew up with, many are focused on having as many invigorating life experiences as they can before the zombie apocalypse, so good luck with your youth-focused succession planning, Mr. or Ms. Hiring Manager.

Besides, who can afford to retire these days? I swear I saw a former VP I worked with bagging groceries at Publix the other day.

Workers over 40 are too set in their ways

Working Stiffed response: Not necessarily; we’re just used to doing things the right way. What some people call “set in their ways” others call avoiding mistakes learned through trial and error. But don’t worry; we have the maturity to sit on the sidelines and let the young guns try out “awesome” out-of-the-box ideas, even if we know these sparks of innovation will turn into a waste of time and money.

The value of workers over 40

I’m sure the writer of the Business Article meant well; after all he was trying to sell the virtues of hiring mature employees. Unfortunately, the emphasis of the article was to inform companies that they have an opportunity to benefit from hiring experienced older workers at any crap salary they choose by exploiting the fact that many are now broke and desperate after being forced out of the workforce. It’s hard to appreciate such support when your alleged sole virtue is that you’re a bargain who should be fished out of the clearance bin.

Instead of focusing on the reasons to avoid hiring experienced workers, let’s look at the benefits of hiring qualified people over 40 (and, no, saving money by underpaying them isn’t a sound strategy):

If you pay us what we’re worth, we will likely MORE than earn our salary

We’ve already learned from our mistakes, so we won’t make them on your dime. Plus, we can hit the ground running and we’re more likely to have the emotional maturity needed to build relationships with stakeholders and to work well with others (that go-getter ego a lot of young managers have often works against getting the job done efficiently or effectively).

If you hire us at a salary worthy of our experience, you’re also likely to get a hard worker who is less likely to jump to another opportunity

Young people know that the only way they are going boost their pay is by jumping to other companies. And if they’re valued at one company, the odds are they’ll be appealing to another company…maybe even a competitor.

A mature employee is more likely to keep their wisdom and hard work ethic around longer, especially if they are paid what they are worth and are appreciated, because they know their job jumping days are behind them.

You need experienced workers to mentor your young talent

When I entered the white collar workforce after graduating from college, I had the benefit of working in a fully staffed department (back before “economies of scale” shrunk every operation to the bone). I learned a lot from my older, experienced coworkers. I don’t think I would have become as skilled in my field without their guidance.

If you have several employees, it’s a good idea to have at least one seasoned veteran to show them the ropes. And if you have limited resources for staffing, you probably don’t have the budget for costly trial and error, so if it comes down to hiring young and cheap or shelling out a little more for an experienced over 40 worker, you’re better off erring on the side of experience.

You get what you pay for

The last year I was employed as a full-time marketing manager, I generated more than 30 times my salary in revenue for my company. When I lost my position after my company was acquired by a competitor, my job was eliminated in favor of the acquiring company’s young, inexperienced manager.

Because she had little hands-on experience, in the year following my departure, she spent more than four times her salary on outside firms and consultants (which I never needed to do); and not only could she not replicate the success I achieved during my tenure with the company, but she allowed the leads and momentum I was building to evaporate.

In the four years since my departure, several former colleagues told me that the company’s marketing efforts are failing miserably, even as they keep adding more young marketing executives.

So, to all the hiring managers and business owners out there, I say keep hiring (and underpaying) inexperienced talent at your own risk. Sure, youthful innovation has it’s place, but so does experience. And the money you save in salary now may end up costing you your job or hurting your business tomorrow.

 

Employee Wellness Program Privacy: Biometric Screening Tyranny

If you went back in time 20 or more years ago and told the people back then that in the near future employers would force them to take a blood test or they would lose their health insurance coverage, I’m sure they’d laugh and assume you were citing some obscure subplot from Orwell’s 1984.

You see, not too long ago, if such a widespread policy was proposed, people would have been outraged and protests would have broken out nationwide to put an end to such a blatant invasion of privacy.

Not so in 21st century America. It looks like all the GMOs we eat, the fluoride in our water and the toxic mercury- and formaldehyde-laced vaccines we take willingly (or not so willingly, if you live in California) has left us brain damaged and semi-comatose.

We know our smartphones and TVs have taken a chunk out of our IQs, which may explain why 10 percent of college grads now believe that Judge Judy is a Supreme Court justice and some Americans think that Martin Luther King was the first black man on the moon. How else can we explain this epidemic of apathy and ignorance when it comes to our rights and freedoms?

We should have known we were in trouble when poor Edward Snowden hung his life out on the line to warn us about the criminal intrusiveness of our government only to have many Americans just shrug and say, “So what? I’ve got nothing to hide.” Hell, these pod people even parroted the government propaganda that he was a traitor.

I’m sure Snowden was even more shocked by our zombie-like reaction to our government’s widespread violation of the Fourth Amendment than he was when he discovered the extent of U.S. government surveillance. He obviously overestimated our present capacity for outrage and action.

So it should come as no surprise that corporate America wants to get in on the invasive fun. And why not? With health insurance premiums skyrocketing, it was only a matter of time before they would exploit our complacent idiocy by persuading employees to willingly submit to biometric screenings that measure blood pressure, weight, waist size, body mass index (BMI), cholesterol levels and other health vitals, or risk paying health coverage surcharges (as smokers already do) or losing coverage altogether.

So what if these wellness programs violate Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) laws or the protected health information (PHI) provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)? You’ve got nothing to hide, right? And, gee, what’s wrong with getting healthy and getting a discount on your employer health insurance coverage?

The Gift of Obamacare: Making Private Health Information Public

As if the Patient Protection and “Affordable” Care Act (ACA) wasn’t bad (and unconstitutional) enough by forcing you to buy health insurance from a private company under threat of tax penalties (?), we can also blame Obamacare for the explosion of invasive employee wellness screenings.

Surprised? Don’t be. After all, the ACA was written by the insurance companies and Jonathan Gruber, an arrogant, elitist jerk from MIT who laughed and admitted that the stupidity of American voters made this mess possible.

One would have thought that the Gruber fiasco would have been enough to inspire public outrage and force a repeal of Obamacare…but, again, you’d be overestimating the pod people who have body-snatched millions of once spirited, freedom-loving Americans.

The ACA helped advance the notion that healthy lifestyles would control health care costs; what seemed like harmless, even positive, rhetoric at the time has now been exposed as just another privacy-invading, money-making venture. It’s always about taking your money and invading your privacy with these clowns.

Anyone who has had a screening or physical in recent years knows that these examinations are designed to do one thing and one thing only…to make you a lifelong dependent on some hideously overpriced pharmaceutical drug that has 29 potentially lethal side effects (and the more drugs they can prescribe, safely or not, the better).

In 2014, 95 percent of employers had a health risk assessment, biometric screening or some type of wellness screening program in place, and 74 percent of the programs dangled an incentive carrot to get employees to participate (comply) usually a modest discount in health plan premiums.

Such high adoption rates by employers mean that these programs will now likely determine the course of your career. Good luck climbing the corporate ladder after your boss learns that you’re on an anti-psychotic and three blood pressure medications.

It’s Voluntary…Until it’s Not

Even if your company’s wellness plan is voluntary now, don’t be fooled. That’s how it always starts. Like a lot companies, Flambeau, a Wisconsin-based plastic maker, introduced their “voluntary” wellness program as a way to lower their health care costs and cut down on employee sick days.

But since wellness programs need high participation rates in order to get the best bang for the corporate buck, when participation rates are low, some companies are motivated to take off the kid gloves and make it a requirement for keeping insurance coverage. That’s what Flambeu did, and one employee who refused to participate in Flambeau’s program filed a complaint with the EEOC.

The Flambeu lawsuit is one of several such cases working their way through the legal system these days. The EEOC’s main argument in the Flambeu suit, and others like it, is that forcing employees to participate in wellness programs, especially when they involve biometic screening or health assessments,  violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA prohibits companies from obtaining personal health information from employees or requiring that they submit to a medical exam. End of story, right?

Not so fast. For some reason, the U.S. District Court in Wisconsin didn’t see it that way. They ruled that data collected through wellness programs doesn’t violate the ADA. The EEOC is reviewing the decision, whatever that means.

Biometric Gene-ings and GINA

While the EEOC is leveraging ADA protections in its wellness program lawsuits, it’s also citing the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), as it did in its suit on behalf of employees of Honeywell. Under GINA, employers are prohibited from requesting genetic information from employees, especially when that information is tied to health insurance coverage.

Honeywell employees turned to the EEOC after they balked at participating in the company’s wellness program and were slapped with a fat insurance premium surcharge. Employee spouses weren’t spared either; they were hit with a $1,000 tobacco surcharge for not coughing up their DNA, whether they smoked or not (guilty until proving innocent?).

Smokers know a thing or two about health insurance tyranny. Our poor, nicotine-addicted social pariah friends are always convenient canaries in the coal mine when it comes to test driving civil rights violations.

The EEOC cited both the ADA and GINA in the Honeywell case. And while the Minnesota District Court denied the EEOC’s request to issue a temporary restraining order against Honeywell’s wellness program, in its decision, the court expressed some concern as to how  the ACA wellness directive would jibe with the ADA, GINA and other privacy laws. Ya think?

The courts are all over the place in these decisions (lower courts have handed out victories to both sides) and it’s hard to say when, or if, definitive judicial determination will ever emerge.

Employee Wellness Programs Can Hurt Your Credit Rating?

Another consideration: you may have noticed that your company hired an outside company to administer their wellness program. In addition to worrying that your boss will learn that you have high blood pressure, should you also be concerned that your info will be sold to a credit monitoring company or third-party marketer…and that your screening could affect your ability to get a car loan or mortgage in the future?

As it turns out, yes, you should be concerned, because wellness program vendors are not bound by HIPAA privacy protections.

If you read the fine print in their terms & conditions, you’ll find that many of these contractors have policies that allow them to share “identifiable data” with unidentified third parties “working to improve employee health.” Also, “de-identified” group health results are regularly shared with employers and researchers, and it’s been proven that this data can easily by “re-identified” and used for credit screening, marketing…or even… job displacement?

Think that Fitbit or other wearable fitness device makes you look cool? It turns out it also makes data mining your vitals that much easier. Nice, huh?

Health Care Employees VOLUNTEER their Protected Health Information

As an uninsured, underemployed freelancer, wellness programs didn’t ping my radar until recently when my client, a prestigious regional health care system, needed me to craft some employee communications regarding their wellness program.

The last time I was a full-time, salaried employee, employee wellness programs were strictly voluntary, so I didn’t give it a second thought. I quickly learned how much the ACA changed things.

Having worked in health care in some capacity for nearly two decades, I couldn’t believe that hospital personnel would agree to this madness. After all, these people would be terminated immediately if they violated a patient’s private health information, so why would they surrender their own private information? Shockingly, I learned many did just that.

I’m sure many workers realize this is a violation of their privacy, but they’re scared that if they don’t participate, they’ll end up on some undesirable human resources list (unfortunately, they’re probably right).

Others, who see themselves as being fit and healthy, may comply because they feel that they…wait for it… have nothing to hide.  Good for them, but what if someone has a condition that they have a right to hide from the world?

What if you’re bipolar or diabetic, for example? Or, what if you have either condition, but don’t know it yet? Would you feel comfortable having your boss find out at the same time that you do? And how confident are you that you’d survive the next mass layoff if your biometric screening places you outside “normal” health levels in one or more categories? After all, there’s no way to prove that your condition would have had anything to do with your termination.

Don’t think for one minute that today’s corporate tightwads won’t weigh your health status when deciding if they want, or need, to part company with you, especially if they know that your fat medical bills will go with you.

Unfortunately, these days, the government and large employers don’t have to try too hard to push us toward controlled serfdom; they’ve handed us the shovel and we’re digging our way there ourselves, thank you. The powers that be have no need to fear torch and pitchfork mobs in the U.S. anymore.

No, the freeze-dried American zombie masses are content to drink beer, obsess over football and reality TV (our modern day bread and circuses) and to silently go along to get along. I guess as long as we have “nothing to hide” and Judge Judy is sitting on the Supreme Court, we have nothing to worry about.

 

Pew! Something Stinks: the Disappearing American Middle Class

Anyone who is surprised by the recent Pew Research Center report that the American middle class is “losing ground” hasn’t been paying attention.

Even Helen Keller could have seen this coming. According to the report, the rich keep getting obscenely richer. You don’t say! Another shocker: more than a quarter of adult Americans 65 or older improved their bottom lines (26.7 percent), while many of the rest of us have been bleeding out financially.Pew Research_Middle Class

Ah, yes, the postwar “me-me-me generation” of baby boomers; the generation that was in charge in the ‘90s. Some of their notable achievements:

  • Supporting job-busting “trade” agreements (NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT, et al.), which laid the groundwork for the even more suicidal TPP
  • They converted the personal-sounding term “personnel” into the more disposable-sounding “human resources”…morphed “hiring” into “onboarding” … and turned “firing” into the sterile “offboarding” or murderous “terminating”
  • And now, many won’t retire, even when they are comfortable financially, making an already tight labor market even less accessible to the rest of us

Me-me-me to the end.

The study also showed that from 1970-2015, adult blacks saw a larger increase in income than any other racial or ethnic group (up 11.2 percent), and blacks were also the only group not to experience a decline in their lower-income share. See? Sometimes black lives do matter!

Married people with or without children at home also fared much better than single people. That makes sense, since it now takes two salaries to equal half of what one salary was worth 10 years ago.

Pew defines middle class Americans as adults whose annual income is double to two-thirds of the national median wage. In 1971, 61 percent of adult Americans enjoyed middle class status; that rate has plunged to only 50 percent now. The number of high income American adults spiked from 14 percent to 21 percent, and the number of low income households also increased (from 25 percent to 29 percent).

All in all, the study further validates Ross Perot’s “giant sucking sound” prediction. In 1992, he warned that America’s labor market would be destroyed if NAFTA passed; how right he was. The report charts the decline of our middle class beginning in the early ‘90s and accelerating considerably in the ‘00s.

By then, NAFTA was really kicking into gear and virtually all of our manufacturing jobs were exported overseas. I just hope that Chinese factory workers can take a break from making our iPhones every once in a while to make enough respirators for the citizens of Beijing. Sure, let’s cry for the polar bears while our captains of industry suffocate the poor Chinese people with low-cost, unregulated manufacturing and limited breathable air.

With our manufacturing gone, our labor market now consists primarily of very high- or very low-skilled occupations.

But, wait, there’s more!

In recent years, our crooked Congressional “representatives” continued to beat the walking dead middle class by boosting the number of tech “guest” work visas granted to their corporate sponsors.  U.S. workers in high-skilled positions are now routinely replaced by foreign “guests” who are paid much less.

Congress also has allowed an endless parade of illegal aliens to cross our open boarder and they are now calling for us to import Syrian refugees to fill the low-skilled jobs that Americans supposed won’t do. It’s clear that the psychopaths running our government are fast-tracking us to Third World status. And…we’re…letting…them. Why?

Each holiday season, retailers bemoan the fact that people aren’t spending as much as they used to. Well, if we don’t have jobs, or the jobs we have pay less they used to, or we are “gig” employees who don’t know if or when we’ll see another paycheck, then the odds are pretty good that we’re not going to have a lot of Benjamins…or bitcoins…or any type of digital currency…to slide across your registers or online shopping carts.

In my last post, I described how today’s U.S. worker is trapped in an environment of economic cannibalism; the Pew study proves it.

Pew. Something sure does stink around here.

 

No Bezos (kisses) at Amazon

I like a good scary story as much as the next person, but I can’t think of any piece of horror fiction in recent memory that has frightened me more than last week’s New York Times feature article about Amazon.

Anyone who has had a white collar job within the last 10 years is familiar with some of the workplace hazards alluded to in the article:

  • the annoying coworkers who like to email people at 2 am on weekends to prove/time stamp their dedication;
  • others who show up at the office at the crack of dawn and/or stay late;
  • the busybodies who like to provide unsolicited “feedback” (usually negative) about colleagues to superiors; or
  • colleagues who feel that humiliating you in meetings will spur you to achieve workplace excellence (this is usually the public explanation; the real reason is they either resent you or don’t like you).

Individually, these behaviors are annoying, but when they are ALL part of a company’s corporate culture…even codified in the employee handbook (check out Amazon’s 14 leadership principals), then you’re hitting horror story territory.

Bezos responded to fallout from the Times article by saying that he wouldn’t want to work for a company like the one described in the article. One can argue that he doesn’t, really, since as CEO, he isn’t subjected to the annual “culling” of staff, and no one in their right mind would dream of submitting secret feedback about him via the company’s Orwellian Anytime Feedback Tool (a widget in the company’s directory that employees are encouraged to use to submit praise or criticism about colleagues to management). Of course, Feedback Tool submissions are factored into the decision-making at the annual culling of Amazon’s overworked herd. Double-plus ungood.

Bezos likes his Feedback Tool so much, he’s invested in an HR software company that makes a similar product. So, in the near future, if you find yourself on the wrong end of a crappy performance review and lose your job, it may just be because the office psycho who doesn’t like you colluded with other office misfits to funnel tons of real-time negative feedback about you to your boss. Creepy, huh? Get ready; it’s coming.

So, is Bezos a driven visionary…a textbook bipolar CEO…a sadist…or all of the above? Who can say for sure? What is obvious is that, in his infinite, algorithm-loving mania, Bezos (whose name literally means “kisses” in Spanish) has reworked the KISS principle (Keep it Simple, Stupid) to mean, Keep it Stressful, Stupid. His fiefdom is truly a Darwinian dystopia on steroids.

I guess while we wait for the robots to take our jobs, corporate overlords like Bezos are going to bide their time by making us work like robots. That way, they can literally work us to death and we won’t be around to complain about losing our jobs to C-3PO in the near future. A recent study shows this isn’t that farfetched a concept.

A stroke of bad luck?

In recent years, we’ve been hearing more and more about uncharacteristically young people…folks in their thirties and forties…having strokes. Why, we wondered? Well, it turns out that Amazon’s top performers aren’t thinking long term when it comes to embracing the 80-hour workweeks that are the hallmark of Amazonian excellence.

Less than a week after the Times/Amazon article appeared, the London Guardian reported that scientists at University College London found that if you put in more than 55 hours a week at work, you have a 33 percent higher stroke risk and a 13 percent higher risk of having a heart attack than “slackers” who work only 35-40 hours a week.

What I want to know is, if you stroke out at your desk at Amazon, will Bezos offer you free shipping to the funeral home of your choice?

Smart CEOs Know That Paid Time Off + Good Wages = Growth

They say you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar (although no one has ever explained why you’d want to). Apparently, you can also catch more revenue if you treat your employees like honeys.

Numerous studies have shown that fairly compensated workers are more loyal to their employers and more committed to growing their business. Research also shows that workers who are given, and encouraged to take, paid time off are more productive and enjoy better physical and mental health.

So, why are so many 21st century decision-makers hell bent on grinding their workers into pulp 24/7 at the lowest possible wage, stripping them of pensions and benefits, and outsourcing anyone they can? Did the “Successful CEO” handbook go out of print before an e-book could be produced?

Fortunately, there are a few visionary CEOs who get it, and they are reaping the financial rewards. Richard Branson tops the small, yet inspiring list.

Branson is not only reaching for the stars with Virgin Galactic, but he is a star to his employees. In a recent Inc. interview, Branson said you should “put your staff first, your customers second, and your shareholders third,” and his actions support these words. Branson’s latest act of employee generosity is to give new “Virgin” mothers and fathers up to a year of paid leave.

So, while most corporate leaders are “lowering admin costs” and dodging angry, unmotivated workers and frustrated shareholders, Branson is high-fiving his happy staffers and getting ready to fly to outer space…thanks to the buckets of money his motivated employees help him earn.

Then there’s Dan Price, CEO of Gravity Payments. This generous leader decided to raise the minimum annual salary of all 70 of his employees to $70,000 a year (nearly doubling the salary of many). Price bankrolled the move with three-quarters of the company’s profits and by cutting his own salary from $1 million per year to $70,000. He won’t give himself a raise until profits allow him to increase it.

Price would get along swimmingly with Centro CEO Shawn Riegsecker. His company offers employees with four years of service three-week paid sabbaticals. After taking a rejuvenating sabbatical, Riegsecker had an epiphany that his employees (and Centro) would benefit from enjoying a similar experience. Centro employees also get 10 “Ferris Bueller” days— they can take these vacation days for any reason.

Is Centro’s generous vacation/sabbatical policy hurting their bottom line? Actually, no. The ad software agency employs 600 people and enjoys continuous, impressive revenue growth.

Branson, Price, and Riegsecker aren’t just nice guys, they are good businessmen. As Riegsecker explains it: “I firmly believe that we’re moving in the world to a place where focusing on the happiness, health, well-being, and fulfillment of your employees is the number one determinant of success.”

True enough, especially when you consider that we have ample evidence that the “penny wise, pound foolish” business model is nothing more than economic cannibalism. Eventually, it eats everyone, even those at the top. At some point, CEOs of U.S.-based companies have to invest in their employees, so we can build a healthy, productive workforce that has money to spend.

In the interim, in the name of consistency, the reorganization/outsourcing junkies at the top of the corporate food chain should apply their “reorganization” plans across the board; not just to lower wage earners.

Since one of them is worth hundreds or more of us, their final act of corporate efficiency should be to outsource themselves in favor of cost-effective, innovative executives. And maybe, if we’re lucky, they will be replaced by leaders who follow Branson, Price or Riegsecker’s recipe for growth and enterprise-wide satisfaction.

In HR, F— You is the New Normal

We should have known we were in trouble when companies across America decided to re-brand personnel departments with the chillingly impersonal moniker, “human resources.” Seemingly overnight, employees morphed from living, breathing members of a company’s “family” or “team” to disposable “resources” or widgets. And it’s even worse for job applicants.

These days, unless a company wants to hire you, their HR department treats you like you were some drunk they picked up at a bar. They take you home, have their way with you, mutter “I’ll call you” as they push you out the door, and you never hear from them again.

When you’re out of work, it’s hard enough to muster up the mojo to shower, shave (if necessary), and get all cleaned up to go to an interview…or two…or three (if you’re lucky), especially when you’re so comfortable in your sweats and t-shirts for weeks on end between interviews. You know what I’m talking about.

Then there’s the time and consideration spent on selecting and submitting samples/evidence of your talent. Preparing for an interview (or multiple interviews) doesn’t just take time, it takes money many of us can’t spare (gas for your car, if you’re driving to an interview or carfare, and dry cleaning or purchasing interview suits/clothes).

So, when you’re done with the dog and pony show and they decide you didn’t make the cut, why don’t HR recruiters call or  email you to let you know they hired someone else and to thank you for your time and interest? When did this professional courtesy become unnecessary?

What, they had a hot date with a PowerPoint presentation? They were distracted by the donuts in the break room? They needed to send out another useless United Way fundraising email to their underpaid employees? Are they all trying to hide the fact that they are more than functionally illiterate (although, this may be a likely reason)?

Like most of you, I’ve known and worked with my share of HR people and they don’t seem to be saddled with a lot to do.

And when they do appear busy, it usually comes at your expense. They tend to pull you away from your 50-hour work week for an URGENT meeting about the holiday party, or to set up a task force to determine whether the company should replace the Skittles in the vending machines with tofu chips.

Seriously, why can’t these people acknowledge the effort you made to audition for their company?

Sorry, HR people…there is no excuse. On behalf of unemployed people everywhere who wait for calls that will never come, and to acknowledge your autistic-like indifference to the plight of those of us who DARE to ping your email box with our resumes, I propose we re-brand your profession once again; let’s just call you social misfits what you are: person-null un-professionals.

What do you think, fellow working stiffs? What would you call these gatekeepers of corporate incompetence?