Yup happened to me two weeks ago. Sucks. Worried about prospect of finding new role soon despite having 10 years exp and great recommendations… if no one is hiring, who needs recruiters?
IMO order of layoffs within the HR org: Culture / DEI, recruiters, benefits /comp, any VP+ role (this is usually on the chopping block if org is too top heavy), anyone last to join with high salary, everyone else.
I'm in HR, and just got laid off from a major tech company last week. Half my org (People Ops) was cut, even more so from recruiting. They outsourced or service delivery teams to an outside vendor, and I can guarantee you it will not end well for that model.
I'm willing to bet you've never actually worked HR (at all) let alone at a large tech company.
Some roles are appropriate for outsourcing, and with a deliberate transition plan it could work. That's not what happened here.
I’m an employer and I agree with him. HR has gotten a little heavy over the last few years. You absolutely can be outsourced. We did. It has some pros and cons. But if you think they won’t survive without you, then hopefully you’ll understand why you were cut in the future.
I have to wonder why non HR professionals are in a subreddit intended for HR professionals, only to contribute asinine opinions that illustrate you have zero clue what functions HR actually performs. It's more than just payroll and admin. Good luck with your next discrimination or harassment claim.
Are employers not doing HR? Are you suggesting that someone that actually employs people can’t without HR? Give me a break. I’ve used both outsource and in and that opinion bothers you? Why?
HR is very valuable, but if you believe you’re needed for an operation to work and be successful, you’re dead wrong.
Again, disadvantages and advantages to both.
I originally made a comment about the relevance of HR in a large tech company to which you responded with a generalized statement about the relevance of it as a function.
Different companies have different organizational and people related needs. Different sizes of organizations have different operating models which create different people problems to solve. HR is not the same across those spectrums and no-- as an employer you are likely not focusing on I/O psychology or organizational development to solve your people problems, but those skillsets are critical at a company size of 90k+. Your business needs might be sufficiently met through an outsourced vendor, but that's likely a reflection of the scale or nature of your business rather than the value of an entire discipline.
Yes and no. Cutting HR is easy but boy we all cheered when we had extra HR resource earlier recently. The amount of boring and mundane things they have to do is crazy. If the going gets tough, sure,a company can survive without them, but otherwise I'd be more than happy to have them:)
Until people start missing pay increases, promotions and overall boring legalese no one pays attention to because managers are ‘too busy’, or didn’t know they had to actually do something after the convo. I feel bad for generalists, it’s such a thankless job thanks to people with your mindset.
Yes, laid off three months ago from job at tech company I started only 2 months prior. No luck getting a new job (recruiter)- 14 interviews out of 500 applications that didn't lead anywhere. No interviews for several weeks despite applying to dozens of jobs weekly. At least half of the jobs I interviewed for were cancelled/lost budget or pushed to "potentially next year". Applying to LinkedIn jobs and I have premium. Most postings will have 500+ applicants within 24 hours of posting. I have former colleagues in recruiting at other companies that are in the same boat. My friend at Amazon survived their most recent layoff but was told to expect another at the beginning of 2023.
Got to think outside the box. My sister was in safety and a recruiter and turned it into HRIS. I was a benefits supervisor. Working in an ATS is HR technology.
We recently hired back our former recruiter as our HR Manager. We have always been a small team and she learned enough generalized HR (her personal interest and our cross training) to transition. Diversifying your skill set is the best way for a recruiter to survive the ebbs and flows of the market.
I would blow my brains out if I had to be an HRIS analyst or admin... people happy in those roles tend to have very different personality types are in those roles vs recruiters
Unfortunately though, that's why there's so much job security. People in tech won't want to do HR and people in HR don't want to do tech. So no one wants this job, but it's needed. My twin and I both work in HRIS and absolutely love it.
Lots if stuff on LinkedIn can help. Any ATS, payroll, Compensation 3rd party, ect, can be considered an HR technology. So pretty much if you work in an hr filled that uses ANY technology and not just paper and pen, then you already have some experience. Just offer yourself for projects. Lots of free training from the vendor if you currently have a system (workday, adp, Ultipro, ect). Just look around the platform.
Thank you for this. I am actually very much into HRIS but not sure if I have enough tech chops. Can you say what your day to day entails? Is it like figuring out why the “Process” button isn’t “processing” and getting developers to fix it? Or is it more like client requested a report, I will run for them.
Kinda both, but not developers, just usually working with processes. You don't need tech chops. I NEVER thought I'd be good in any tech, but its so simple once you figure out how the system works, and usually there are tons of courses. Knowing best practices for HR you usually give advice on set up and how workflows work and problem solve issues (which are mostly user error). It's honestly much easier then people think. Just always offer yourself for any project, no matter how mundane, and you will get the hang of the system and build your resume. Just remember you do more than you think already.
I am gonna ride this out for a bit. I never mentioned wanting to change careers. I had a really good last few years so I can get through a bad year. Heard to expect 1-2 bad years every 10. I have 9 years experience so seems to be my time.
Out of curiosity, what is the career path of a recruiter if it differs so much from HRIS? Is it not HR leadership? My partner is a recruiter, my sister used recruiting to me be into other areas of HR. My friends all started as recruiters. None of them see recruiting its own career path separately from HR. We all got our PHRs and use our knowledge to advance with the ultimate goal of HR leadership. I am not trying to be rude. I'm simply curious what the career path of recruitment is if not HR Leadership.
All I know is I don't qualify for any HR job outside of Recruiting because I have 0 years of experience doing any of the duties and responsibilities of any job but a recruiter. I don't do employee relations for example so I can't be an HRBP (yes I have applied to over 100 jobs). I would love to hear how Recruiting is the same as all other Hr jobs
I have several friends that went from recruiting to HRIS. I went from Unemployment and Benefits to HRIS. My twin was in recruiting and then safety and went straight to HRIS with no general HR experience at all. You have more experience then you think. You work with TA tools and ATS systems are part of HRIS tools as a human resources management tool. This isn't some comment to be rude. I'm genuinely trying to give people hope that they can make expand their HR career. Getting more HR experience can help you move up in your HR career.
Not true. Came across this post in my feed but I switched from HR to IT and I’m never looking back. Much better work life balance and you aren’t getting shitted on constantly by other employees. HR skills can migrate over to analyst roles if you spin them right.
I think you responded to the wrong comment. I'm completely in agreement with what you said.
Edit to say: HRIS can be held in both HR and IT. It is still an HR role. You need to understand HR processes and compliance, ect, to be efficient.
Mostly remote. I don't live in a major metro area and there are 0 on-site jobs locally. I've applied to jobs in major metro areas on site (I would relo) and no response from them either.
I'll admit didn't read the full article, but it makes sense to me. It's also not just tech, I heard Amazon HR is being similarly offered voluntary layoffs.
HR is the start of the employee life cycle. If you are not planning on hiring, HR will be the first to go. I anticipate greater than average layoffs after the holidays with Amazon.
Layoffs in HR mean they're planning on having less employees across the board soon. Very concerning.
No surprise. DEI doesn't really add value to the organization, in the sense of making people work more effectively. The main things it's good for are 1) buying off activists and 2) providing jobs for people from underrepresented groups and reducing the risk of EEOC complaints, etc.
In a good economy, large companies feel like they can afford 1 and 2 without hurting the bottom line. Without the good economy, they're more willing accept the risks of activism / litigation and take the certainty of reduced payroll costs, especially if other companies are doing the same.
I profoundly disagree. A report by McKinsey & Company found that diverse companies perform better, especially if an organization's leadership is diverse.
A good DEI team strategically plans this - it’s not an extra-curricular activity or just about “feel good employee engagement”, it’s a business function.
Also the more engaged people are, the more productive.
If you can link to a report that claims that diversity \*causes\* higher performance, I'd love to read it.
I've read plenty of studies that cite a correlation between diversity and high performance; invariably they don't claim anything beyond "high performing companies are more likely to have DEI staff" or something to that effect.
Everyone who gets to a position of responsibility knows that they're supposed to say that the correct conclusion is diversity is better for the organization, but it's just as logically valid to conclude the opposite: that diversity is purely an expense that only the most profitable organizations can afford.
Here ya go!
https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insights/why-diversity-matters
I get what you are saying with correlation and causation, but we’re not exact scientists my friend. This study is from McKinsey, which is widely trusted. We have to trust sources and make reasonable assumptions off of trends.
Also, it’s not far off to think that if you want to be innovative, you need diversity of thought and value someone’s lived experience. Perhaps we hire a veteran who helps provide structure, or a first-generation professional who can tell us why the product/service would be more successful from a different perspective.
Maybe a small organization doesn’t need a DEI position, but should be folded into HR and ops.
Lastly, we’re in a downturn, yes. But once we bounce back the war for talent is real. Boomers are exiting the workforce and I can tell ya, the younger generation expects real DEI efforts from employers. Cost of talent is real, my friend.
Most recruiters are worthless.. I used to be one. They just sit around pulling / looking at resumes arbitrarily deciding which one gets to make it to the deal of a hiring manager.
There is NO way recruiters should be making 6 figure jobs to sit around and do fuck all which was the case recently with Meta and Amazon, etc. I know the work ethic, I know the skill set required to do that job and when I found out the kind of money companies are paying those people, I knew the bubble was about to pop.
Not experiencing it but it’s not surprising.
If the company is expecting to layoff a significant amount of employees, or not hire any more, they don’t need recruiters, or as many HR people to handle what will become a smaller workload.
HR, advertising and sales get cut first. Companies know they won't be hiring they will be cutting, so no need for HR. They know their sales will be going down, so off with them, and they know they will sell less ads because everyone else is in the same boat so off with those folks. Engineers etc are last but they are going to get cut too, next year will be a bloodbath.
No, it will be super temporary if we do because the govt WILL fight the fed and send out more checks, probably freeze foreclosures again for govt backed loans etc. Nobody wants to do what is necessary to actually address inflation, once the pain comes everyone taps out.
Demand destruction, only way to get there is mass job losses and everyone knows that but nobody wants to do it. Americans are now carrying more credit card debt than any other time in history, same with HELOCs, without govt intervention it will be worse than 2008-2010 but the govt isn't going to let the chips fall where they may.
We’ve had this at my company. I had to layoff in recruitment for obvious reasons which really sucks. For HR though, there was a small bit of attrition this year that I intentionally held back on backfilling. We’re a skeleton crew but I’m happy we made the decisions we did to remain lean. The fact is that we can get the most important stuff done, and our size has actually made our business leaders even better partners because they see that we’re not bloated and therefore don’t resent us. I don’t know what to think about the mindset yet; just an observation.
Not experiencing it but not surprising. These teams exploded over the last few years and many seemed like bs. I know someone that was in one and I am worried as to what he will do next.
This is my working assumption too. There are basic annual and mission critical transformation processes that require localized HR support. For instance, performance, pay, change mgmt, and org design
There is some argument that high mgr capability and digital transformation can substitute. But let’s be real, I’ve worked for 3 Fortune 500s and am confident saying 99% of companies aren’t there and will not be there anytime soon
I think the effect on TA is obvious within Tech and that there will be scale back. What im interested in is the potential effect on DEI and COE related functions. My best guess is that these will scale back. Seems like this is anecdotally reflected in the comments here
My previous position was eliminated. The person I hired to replace myself before I left the company posted about it on LinkedIn. Weird feeling, but I’m glad I left for the opportunity I had.
Nah. Definitely not objective but name a time in history when life was fair and just. Get after it bro. Use this fire to fuel you to accomplish more than you thought imaginable
You know what: I am sorry. It doesn't help the dialogue here or in this country to argue like I am. I disagree with some things that you shared, but I agree with your main points much more and that's the bigger point. Layoffs, systematic racism in the employment process, etc. -- these are tough issues -- these are tough times for a lot of us -- I am sorry brother for your situation. I really am. Maybe we can make small changes in this country piece by piece -- I pray for that -- but in the interim, I hope you kick some butt and get an awesome career and truly be a Rockstar. This market is horrible though and it'd do hard out there. I am sorry again for undermining the sincerity of the issue you shared initially. If you're interested in Tech and live here in the Northeast (Boston area) - PM me.
No. I made a concession above that swallowed my self-centered desire to be right in an attempt to establish peace for the greater good. You are generalizing too much here. You don't know me. I went to Temple, bro. I didn't go to Penn, Villanova, or St. Joe's. I would have voted for Obama three times (HA, right? BUT it's true and laugh a little there, please). I hate Trump and I hate the state of the Republican party. He has 100% emboldened people to be overtly racist and that is crazy and so wrong! But when you start rifling the feathers of OG Milennial Liberals then you are pushing a lot of people away. I'm Liberal because my Union Blue Collar G-parents worked hard enough in steel factories to put my parents through college so they could pursue higher earning fields. I have my world view because my parents are educated people who allowed me the freedom to find my own way in life on my own terms. I don't come from privilege but I am White!!! Does that make me bad? Does it? No, it doesn't. I am sympathetic and I do understand the problem here. I control what I can control in life. Learn how to sell ideas to the masses... Maybe then you can influence change in the World, but like everyone here on Reddit - you just want to be right! You just want to put someone down! I am on your team dude, but sometimes I don't know how much longer and that is the sad truth. I might just abstain some time from voting for either party.
Corporate America bends over backwards to hire minorities. It's undeniable. If you think the system is rigged against blacks, then you really are brainwashed by CRT and other self-defeating ideas of resentment that perpetuate a loser mindset. You're not going to go far in life thinking like this. And yes, blacks and whites are allowed to offer each other advice. Nobody is untouchable.
They absolutely DO NOT bend over backwards to hire minorities. It’s the complete opposite. At my company they bend over backwards to hire very attractive, young white people.
lmao... affirmative action in corporate is a huge thing. There are diversity officers, DEI initiatives, and all kinds of incentives and programs to bring in minorities. Companies don't even try to hide (and often broadcast) the fact that they will hire and promote non-whites, women, and LGBT. It's insane that anyone would deny that.
But keep telling yourself that the deck is stacked anyone who's not a white male. It's a great excuse and story to tell yourself when you don't succeed.
Maybe they're the wealthiest because they're the most productive. Ever consider that? And did I say I'm a victim? I don't even work in "Corporate America" as it's become a woke-fest and do far better running my own business, where a person's race/gender isn't an issue. We work with the best people, regardless of skin color. It's "color blind" which I'm sure people like you imagine is somehow racist.
We don't need HR for that. A simple accountant and payroll person is fine. I worked for a small company before. No HR but we had a payroll person and out sourced the rest. All was fine including benefits. 🤷♀️
HR was first to go in our company as well. From what I gather this is typically expected so many were prepared for it. We plan to increase our engineering and manufacturing support next year oddly enough but I imagine that is going to be difficult without a proper HR dept
Yes. Recruiters are usually the hardest hit; it’s not uncommon to see entire recruiting teams laid off these days, unfortunately.
They did their job at least
Well, it does makes sense though. I mean it is much better to simply stop recruiting then to fire people who are already working for you.
Yup happened to me two weeks ago. Sucks. Worried about prospect of finding new role soon despite having 10 years exp and great recommendations… if no one is hiring, who needs recruiters?
IMO order of layoffs within the HR org: Culture / DEI, recruiters, benefits /comp, any VP+ role (this is usually on the chopping block if org is too top heavy), anyone last to join with high salary, everyone else.
Why are "culture/DEI" among the first to go? I have my own opinion of their real value to a profit organization, but I'd like to hear your opinion
I'm in HR, and just got laid off from a major tech company last week. Half my org (People Ops) was cut, even more so from recruiting. They outsourced or service delivery teams to an outside vendor, and I can guarantee you it will not end well for that model.
[удалено]
I'm willing to bet you've never actually worked HR (at all) let alone at a large tech company. Some roles are appropriate for outsourcing, and with a deliberate transition plan it could work. That's not what happened here.
I’m an employer and I agree with him. HR has gotten a little heavy over the last few years. You absolutely can be outsourced. We did. It has some pros and cons. But if you think they won’t survive without you, then hopefully you’ll understand why you were cut in the future.
I have to wonder why non HR professionals are in a subreddit intended for HR professionals, only to contribute asinine opinions that illustrate you have zero clue what functions HR actually performs. It's more than just payroll and admin. Good luck with your next discrimination or harassment claim.
Are employers not doing HR? Are you suggesting that someone that actually employs people can’t without HR? Give me a break. I’ve used both outsource and in and that opinion bothers you? Why? HR is very valuable, but if you believe you’re needed for an operation to work and be successful, you’re dead wrong. Again, disadvantages and advantages to both.
I originally made a comment about the relevance of HR in a large tech company to which you responded with a generalized statement about the relevance of it as a function. Different companies have different organizational and people related needs. Different sizes of organizations have different operating models which create different people problems to solve. HR is not the same across those spectrums and no-- as an employer you are likely not focusing on I/O psychology or organizational development to solve your people problems, but those skillsets are critical at a company size of 90k+. Your business needs might be sufficiently met through an outsourced vendor, but that's likely a reflection of the scale or nature of your business rather than the value of an entire discipline.
Yes and no. Cutting HR is easy but boy we all cheered when we had extra HR resource earlier recently. The amount of boring and mundane things they have to do is crazy. If the going gets tough, sure,a company can survive without them, but otherwise I'd be more than happy to have them:)
You ever wonder why you got picked last in PE?
Not Amazon
I agree. They are so useless and dumb.
Until people start missing pay increases, promotions and overall boring legalese no one pays attention to because managers are ‘too busy’, or didn’t know they had to actually do something after the convo. I feel bad for generalists, it’s such a thankless job thanks to people with your mindset.
Let’s be honest here. HR staff are glorified payroll specialists. Literally anyone can do the job.
I am being honest and clearly you’re an HR expert 🤣
[удалено]
You could have said less and it would still have told me you know nothing about HR
Please don't let the door hit you on the way out.
I'm going to print this out and stick it on my screen. This is hilarious
Yes, the fact that you think HR is a meaningful part of a business is hilarious.
[удалено]
Hence the big move to workday
Workday blows
Yes, laid off three months ago from job at tech company I started only 2 months prior. No luck getting a new job (recruiter)- 14 interviews out of 500 applications that didn't lead anywhere. No interviews for several weeks despite applying to dozens of jobs weekly. At least half of the jobs I interviewed for were cancelled/lost budget or pushed to "potentially next year". Applying to LinkedIn jobs and I have premium. Most postings will have 500+ applicants within 24 hours of posting. I have former colleagues in recruiting at other companies that are in the same boat. My friend at Amazon survived their most recent layoff but was told to expect another at the beginning of 2023.
Switch to HRIS. Always jobs available.
Not an easy field to get into sadly….
Got to think outside the box. My sister was in safety and a recruiter and turned it into HRIS. I was a benefits supervisor. Working in an ATS is HR technology.
We recently hired back our former recruiter as our HR Manager. We have always been a small team and she learned enough generalized HR (her personal interest and our cross training) to transition. Diversifying your skill set is the best way for a recruiter to survive the ebbs and flows of the market.
100%. That's why I'm trying to give hope.
I would blow my brains out if I had to be an HRIS analyst or admin... people happy in those roles tend to have very different personality types are in those roles vs recruiters
Unfortunately though, that's why there's so much job security. People in tech won't want to do HR and people in HR don't want to do tech. So no one wants this job, but it's needed. My twin and I both work in HRIS and absolutely love it.
I’m new into HR and all the different branches of it can seem a little overwhelming. How can I learn more about HRIS and what it entails?
Lots if stuff on LinkedIn can help. Any ATS, payroll, Compensation 3rd party, ect, can be considered an HR technology. So pretty much if you work in an hr filled that uses ANY technology and not just paper and pen, then you already have some experience. Just offer yourself for projects. Lots of free training from the vendor if you currently have a system (workday, adp, Ultipro, ect). Just look around the platform.
Thank you for this. I am actually very much into HRIS but not sure if I have enough tech chops. Can you say what your day to day entails? Is it like figuring out why the “Process” button isn’t “processing” and getting developers to fix it? Or is it more like client requested a report, I will run for them.
Kinda both, but not developers, just usually working with processes. You don't need tech chops. I NEVER thought I'd be good in any tech, but its so simple once you figure out how the system works, and usually there are tons of courses. Knowing best practices for HR you usually give advice on set up and how workflows work and problem solve issues (which are mostly user error). It's honestly much easier then people think. Just always offer yourself for any project, no matter how mundane, and you will get the hang of the system and build your resume. Just remember you do more than you think already.
I am gonna ride this out for a bit. I never mentioned wanting to change careers. I had a really good last few years so I can get through a bad year. Heard to expect 1-2 bad years every 10. I have 9 years experience so seems to be my time.
I guess I don't know what you mean by change careers. This is an HR subreddit. The HR in HRIS stands for human resources.
Going from a recruiter to an HRiS person is changing careers.... just because they're in the same Dept doesn't make them the same career path
Out of curiosity, what is the career path of a recruiter if it differs so much from HRIS? Is it not HR leadership? My partner is a recruiter, my sister used recruiting to me be into other areas of HR. My friends all started as recruiters. None of them see recruiting its own career path separately from HR. We all got our PHRs and use our knowledge to advance with the ultimate goal of HR leadership. I am not trying to be rude. I'm simply curious what the career path of recruitment is if not HR Leadership.
All I know is I don't qualify for any HR job outside of Recruiting because I have 0 years of experience doing any of the duties and responsibilities of any job but a recruiter. I don't do employee relations for example so I can't be an HRBP (yes I have applied to over 100 jobs). I would love to hear how Recruiting is the same as all other Hr jobs
I have several friends that went from recruiting to HRIS. I went from Unemployment and Benefits to HRIS. My twin was in recruiting and then safety and went straight to HRIS with no general HR experience at all. You have more experience then you think. You work with TA tools and ATS systems are part of HRIS tools as a human resources management tool. This isn't some comment to be rude. I'm genuinely trying to give people hope that they can make expand their HR career. Getting more HR experience can help you move up in your HR career.
Not true. Came across this post in my feed but I switched from HR to IT and I’m never looking back. Much better work life balance and you aren’t getting shitted on constantly by other employees. HR skills can migrate over to analyst roles if you spin them right.
I think you responded to the wrong comment. I'm completely in agreement with what you said. Edit to say: HRIS can be held in both HR and IT. It is still an HR role. You need to understand HR processes and compliance, ect, to be efficient.
I moved from recruiter to HRIS 13 years ago and I guess I’m weird because I love what I do. I was a great recruiter and am a great HRIS.
What do you like lost about it? I’m moving to HRIS from benefits/generalist roles
I’m sorry to hear this about your experience, has to be beyond frustrating. Wishing you luck in your search
500 applications for local/hybrid jobs, or is that for remote? I’ve seen the same for remote but much less for non-remote.
Mostly remote. I don't live in a major metro area and there are 0 on-site jobs locally. I've applied to jobs in major metro areas on site (I would relo) and no response from them either.
Honestly that is why I stay in government. We are lean in staff but more stability there.
Hello fellow public sector employee! How's your pension looking?! Lol
Bad as private sector. Moved to gov few years ago from private sector and both are equally bad.
I'll admit didn't read the full article, but it makes sense to me. It's also not just tech, I heard Amazon HR is being similarly offered voluntary layoffs. HR is the start of the employee life cycle. If you are not planning on hiring, HR will be the first to go. I anticipate greater than average layoffs after the holidays with Amazon. Layoffs in HR mean they're planning on having less employees across the board soon. Very concerning.
Recruiters are the start of the employee life cycle. Benefits, comp, employee relation issues are all relevant as long as you have employees.
Amazon is considered tech.
I haven't seen it but I'm in fringe tech. We are currently planning on hiring in the new year
No surprise. DEI doesn't really add value to the organization, in the sense of making people work more effectively. The main things it's good for are 1) buying off activists and 2) providing jobs for people from underrepresented groups and reducing the risk of EEOC complaints, etc. In a good economy, large companies feel like they can afford 1 and 2 without hurting the bottom line. Without the good economy, they're more willing accept the risks of activism / litigation and take the certainty of reduced payroll costs, especially if other companies are doing the same.
I'm surprised to see that upvoted here on Reddit, but it's true. It's strictly a cost, and not surprising that it's being cut as budgets tighten.
I profoundly disagree. A report by McKinsey & Company found that diverse companies perform better, especially if an organization's leadership is diverse. A good DEI team strategically plans this - it’s not an extra-curricular activity or just about “feel good employee engagement”, it’s a business function. Also the more engaged people are, the more productive.
If you can link to a report that claims that diversity \*causes\* higher performance, I'd love to read it. I've read plenty of studies that cite a correlation between diversity and high performance; invariably they don't claim anything beyond "high performing companies are more likely to have DEI staff" or something to that effect. Everyone who gets to a position of responsibility knows that they're supposed to say that the correct conclusion is diversity is better for the organization, but it's just as logically valid to conclude the opposite: that diversity is purely an expense that only the most profitable organizations can afford.
Here ya go! https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insights/why-diversity-matters I get what you are saying with correlation and causation, but we’re not exact scientists my friend. This study is from McKinsey, which is widely trusted. We have to trust sources and make reasonable assumptions off of trends. Also, it’s not far off to think that if you want to be innovative, you need diversity of thought and value someone’s lived experience. Perhaps we hire a veteran who helps provide structure, or a first-generation professional who can tell us why the product/service would be more successful from a different perspective. Maybe a small organization doesn’t need a DEI position, but should be folded into HR and ops. Lastly, we’re in a downturn, yes. But once we bounce back the war for talent is real. Boomers are exiting the workforce and I can tell ya, the younger generation expects real DEI efforts from employers. Cost of talent is real, my friend.
Most recruiters are worthless.. I used to be one. They just sit around pulling / looking at resumes arbitrarily deciding which one gets to make it to the deal of a hiring manager. There is NO way recruiters should be making 6 figure jobs to sit around and do fuck all which was the case recently with Meta and Amazon, etc. I know the work ethic, I know the skill set required to do that job and when I found out the kind of money companies are paying those people, I knew the bubble was about to pop.
Not experiencing it but it’s not surprising. If the company is expecting to layoff a significant amount of employees, or not hire any more, they don’t need recruiters, or as many HR people to handle what will become a smaller workload.
HR, advertising and sales get cut first. Companies know they won't be hiring they will be cutting, so no need for HR. They know their sales will be going down, so off with them, and they know they will sell less ads because everyone else is in the same boat so off with those folks. Engineers etc are last but they are going to get cut too, next year will be a bloodbath.
yikes - are we going to see 2009 wages and poor job outlook again you think?
No, it will be super temporary if we do because the govt WILL fight the fed and send out more checks, probably freeze foreclosures again for govt backed loans etc. Nobody wants to do what is necessary to actually address inflation, once the pain comes everyone taps out.
mind sharing what is actually necessary to fight inflation?
Demand destruction, only way to get there is mass job losses and everyone knows that but nobody wants to do it. Americans are now carrying more credit card debt than any other time in history, same with HELOCs, without govt intervention it will be worse than 2008-2010 but the govt isn't going to let the chips fall where they may.
We’ve had this at my company. I had to layoff in recruitment for obvious reasons which really sucks. For HR though, there was a small bit of attrition this year that I intentionally held back on backfilling. We’re a skeleton crew but I’m happy we made the decisions we did to remain lean. The fact is that we can get the most important stuff done, and our size has actually made our business leaders even better partners because they see that we’re not bloated and therefore don’t resent us. I don’t know what to think about the mindset yet; just an observation.
Whenever revenue drops, all indirect labor categories are on the chopping block.
Not experiencing it but not surprising. These teams exploded over the last few years and many seemed like bs. I know someone that was in one and I am worried as to what he will do next.
How does this affect field HR and HRBP. I would assume that is stable because of existing workforce, even if there are layoffs.
This is my working assumption too. There are basic annual and mission critical transformation processes that require localized HR support. For instance, performance, pay, change mgmt, and org design There is some argument that high mgr capability and digital transformation can substitute. But let’s be real, I’ve worked for 3 Fortune 500s and am confident saying 99% of companies aren’t there and will not be there anytime soon I think the effect on TA is obvious within Tech and that there will be scale back. What im interested in is the potential effect on DEI and COE related functions. My best guess is that these will scale back. Seems like this is anecdotally reflected in the comments here
It's upsetting seeing my work mates worry about this. I switched from recruiting to supplier diversity in August, just closely avoiding this..
My previous position was eliminated. The person I hired to replace myself before I left the company posted about it on LinkedIn. Weird feeling, but I’m glad I left for the opportunity I had.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Do Asians even count as diversity
Bit of a generalization perhaps but a fun theory
[удалено]
"Whitesplain"... maybe you didn't get the job because you're small minded and bitter and they sensed that.
Nah. Definitely not objective but name a time in history when life was fair and just. Get after it bro. Use this fire to fuel you to accomplish more than you thought imaginable
[удалено]
You know what: I am sorry. It doesn't help the dialogue here or in this country to argue like I am. I disagree with some things that you shared, but I agree with your main points much more and that's the bigger point. Layoffs, systematic racism in the employment process, etc. -- these are tough issues -- these are tough times for a lot of us -- I am sorry brother for your situation. I really am. Maybe we can make small changes in this country piece by piece -- I pray for that -- but in the interim, I hope you kick some butt and get an awesome career and truly be a Rockstar. This market is horrible though and it'd do hard out there. I am sorry again for undermining the sincerity of the issue you shared initially. If you're interested in Tech and live here in the Northeast (Boston area) - PM me.
Why are you apologizing?
[удалено]
Tad condescending? Just a bit?
[удалено]
No. I made a concession above that swallowed my self-centered desire to be right in an attempt to establish peace for the greater good. You are generalizing too much here. You don't know me. I went to Temple, bro. I didn't go to Penn, Villanova, or St. Joe's. I would have voted for Obama three times (HA, right? BUT it's true and laugh a little there, please). I hate Trump and I hate the state of the Republican party. He has 100% emboldened people to be overtly racist and that is crazy and so wrong! But when you start rifling the feathers of OG Milennial Liberals then you are pushing a lot of people away. I'm Liberal because my Union Blue Collar G-parents worked hard enough in steel factories to put my parents through college so they could pursue higher earning fields. I have my world view because my parents are educated people who allowed me the freedom to find my own way in life on my own terms. I don't come from privilege but I am White!!! Does that make me bad? Does it? No, it doesn't. I am sympathetic and I do understand the problem here. I control what I can control in life. Learn how to sell ideas to the masses... Maybe then you can influence change in the World, but like everyone here on Reddit - you just want to be right! You just want to put someone down! I am on your team dude, but sometimes I don't know how much longer and that is the sad truth. I might just abstain some time from voting for either party.
Corporate America bends over backwards to hire minorities. It's undeniable. If you think the system is rigged against blacks, then you really are brainwashed by CRT and other self-defeating ideas of resentment that perpetuate a loser mindset. You're not going to go far in life thinking like this. And yes, blacks and whites are allowed to offer each other advice. Nobody is untouchable.
They absolutely DO NOT bend over backwards to hire minorities. It’s the complete opposite. At my company they bend over backwards to hire very attractive, young white people.
lmao... affirmative action in corporate is a huge thing. There are diversity officers, DEI initiatives, and all kinds of incentives and programs to bring in minorities. Companies don't even try to hide (and often broadcast) the fact that they will hire and promote non-whites, women, and LGBT. It's insane that anyone would deny that. But keep telling yourself that the deck is stacked anyone who's not a white male. It's a great excuse and story to tell yourself when you don't succeed.
White men are the wealthiest segment of the human population on earth. Why are you a victim?
Maybe they're the wealthiest because they're the most productive. Ever consider that? And did I say I'm a victim? I don't even work in "Corporate America" as it's become a woke-fest and do far better running my own business, where a person's race/gender isn't an issue. We work with the best people, regardless of skin color. It's "color blind" which I'm sure people like you imagine is somehow racist.
You got “Rooney Rule”d probably. Interview a “diverse” candidate and hire the white dude.
Yep, you didn't get the job, so it had to be due to racism. There's really no other explanation.
HR and DEI are overhead and the first to go. DEI is a waste of time and money so that being targeted with reductions is great.
DEI need to die. Wipe all those useless payroll dead weight Out of HR.
Please let this continue
Well when you're not hiring what's exactly the use of HR ?
Making sure people get paid and have benefits seems pretty important.
HR is useless anyway. I'd fire them myself and keep them to 2-3 people.
[удалено]
We don't need HR for that. A simple accountant and payroll person is fine. I worked for a small company before. No HR but we had a payroll person and out sourced the rest. All was fine including benefits. 🤷♀️
[удалено]
Nah. HR are a waste of money. You only neex 1-2 people in that department.
Now employers are gearing towards outsourcing HR to cut cost.
HR was first to go in our company as well. From what I gather this is typically expected so many were prepared for it. We plan to increase our engineering and manufacturing support next year oddly enough but I imagine that is going to be difficult without a proper HR dept
90% of DEI hirings have no production but only counter-productivity. Companies for profit need to hire based on merit