frustration Friday

Remember the last presidential campaign when we heard endlessly about “Death Panels”? I do, though that may be because I'm a news junkie. Either way whether you remember it, don't remember it, or blocked it out because you are sick of the entire political process, that was back when some people claim that changes to healthcare laws would result in “Death Panels” that would decide who lived and who died.

Yeah, I know. It was a strange and annoying time.  It felt like I was in some kind of indie film mocking the political process.

Read more

I wonder why people associate having money with being some kind of authority.

Let's face it of the many lessons the Great Recession is shown us it's that having money and making money don't necessarily correspond with brains, ethics, or doing anything productive. Some people were just nasty bastards that manipulated the system, got enriched, and help shake up the world economy. I'm not seeing dollar signs translate to some kind of authority here, unless it's expertise in exploitation (and even then some of the stories sound like sheer luck and bad regulation were major factors)

This is an issue of been curious about for a while;, why someone's bank account equals a kind of moral economic, and even political authority.  Certainly we can observe many people that came into money by luck, inheritance, unethical but effective behaviors, and so on.  Certainly people don't look to those made rich by acting or sports performance as authorities on life as much as they do others, so there are instinctively different kinds of "rich experts."

There are people whose large bank accounts certainly have demonstrated talent; Bill Gates, Mark Zukerberg, and more.  Hell, I live in Silicon Valley, a giant mass of smart people making huge amounts of money, and many times that does have to do with talent.  Yet, it's not consistent enough for me to think it's some kind of useful measure or the major measure of someone's authority.

So I've come to the conclusion. This money-is-authority mindset is just easier

It's easy to assume lots of money equals talent, and moral and economic authority. It's a number, a score, a simple way to look at. Very simply it takes less thought.

It's kind of like a financial version of being ordained by God, of divine rule. It's a simple thing to accept and not complicate your worldview with all the messiness of actual life. The King used a rule because God said so, now such and such investment banker or business guru is supposed to be listened to because of his bank account. Numbers as a substitute for God.

I dunno.  Maybe it's a kind of Calvinist thing.

This is just a distraction from the complexities of life. It's just an attempt to make things simple, and easy–and as usual attempts to find simplicity lead to conclusions that are terribly wrong. People can be rich–and poor–for number of reasons that have nothing to do with authority, talent, skill, ethics, or any other virtue. That's just life

Heck, I've ranted about this before. I've even noted that some of us are not paid based on “value” but for other reasons that are entirely legitimate and understandable. That's the way goes.

So, let's get over the idea that bank accounts equal authority. It just means you have money, and you can have it for number of reasons. Looking for leadership, inspiration, understanding, and guidance requires a complex assessment of the people involved.

Sadly, I think we'll be dealing with the idea of authority by bank account for a while to come. I just hope that the trauma of the Great Recession means people are less enchanted with the concept.

– Steven Savage

As you may have heard, apparently some people trying to hire folks for open positions have decided that having a job is one of the major qualifications for getting a job with them. Yes, this is a case where the best qualification for coming to their company is apparently that you're currently employed and willing to leave. People that are out of work are apparently out of luck as well, leading to a strange Catch-22, and evidence that some HR departments don't know what the hell they're doing.

I've tried wracking my brains as to why any sane, rational human being would use this as a standard for hiring, and as far as I can tell it's like the Microsoft rule. You don't get fired for recommending Microsoft is a solution, and if someone you hire turns out to be a bad choice, then you don't have people judging you that you hired someone unemployable because you can say "hey, they had a job at the time!"

However, as you may guess I think this is incredibly stupid. So stupid that it rates both the Frustration Friday and a series of bullet points! So get ready for formatted anger.

So, why do I think this is incredibly stupid? Let me count the ways (and bullet point them, of course).

• First of all, there's the disloyalty factor. Do you actually want to always hire someone willing to skip out on their current job? Have you investigated their background and see if they're prone to skipping jobs anyway?
• Second, there is the question of competency. Have you ever thought of the fact that maybe they want to leave for good reasons, like the really really screwed up their current position?
• Third, there is what I like to call "the you're an ass" factor.  Congratulations, nameless HR person, you've just made you and your company look like a bunch of insensitive clods. By deciding that you only wanted to hire people currently have jobs you have guaranteed you've pissed off anyone who's unemployed, and if you do hire them, they are going to trust you much less–with good reason. Nice job, nameless HR person.
• Fourth, you have just opened your company to potential claimant discrimination suits! Nice job as well, say hello to the EEOC.
• Fifth, you are in an unethical jerk.  You may just think you're doing your job, but really, do you buy that excuse?

So, yes, I think making current employment and a factor in hiring somebody a stupid idea on many levels.

I'd like to end this frustration Friday with some useful suggestions or wisdom. So let me reach out to all those HR people the decided employment should be a factor in hiring people.

Don't do it.

– Steven Savage