Butting Heads with the Director

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
1

I work in human resources, but in the words of my mentor Burke, “Don’t let that fool you, I’m really an okay guy.” I’ve been doing this for about a decade now and I actually like my job, my coworkers, and even the company I work for. I’m an individual contributor, meaning I’m not in charge of anyone, but I’m generally well respected by my peers who come to me with questions that are outside of their areas of expertise. We had a staff meeting today and I butted heads with our director. And while I didn’t think much of it at the time, it’s turned out to be a bit more serious than I thought.

We use the Workday HRIS. If you apply for a job with my company you’ll do it through Workday, when you’re hired it’s processed through Workday, when you complete your benefits it’s through Workday, promotions, disciplinary actions, terminations, etc., etc. are all done through Workday. Workday is our system of record, and ever since we adopted it nearly a decade ago the importance of data accuracy and integrity has been stressed.

During our staff meeting today, another HR employee, Cheryl, asked our director what to do about the unemployment office contacting us about former employees who have applied for unemployment benefits. In particular, there are some former employees whose Workday record shows them as having voluntarily quit instead of being terminated with cause. This wasn’t done for nefarious purposes, we’re not going to contest unemployment claims, but this was done to ensure the former employee would retain the same benefits as someone who quit voluntarily intead of involuntarily.

Like I said, it was a staff meeting, and we have a tradition of speaking freely at these meetings, so I brought up my concerns. Workday is the system of record, and if the reason for termination isn’t accurate it might cause us some problems. The director explained to me that the correct information regarding this employee’s information was stored elsewhere, but I continued to press on. How could I trust the data in the system knowing it’s our practice to input data we know is innaccurate when it’s convenient?

I should have known I was pressing too far when she looked at me and asked, “Why do you need access to that data? What business is it of yours?” But I continued by saying I didn’t need access to that data. But I was in Cheryl’s position a few years ago, and sometimes I would pull employee data we were required to give opposing counsel for litigation purposes, and if we turn over documentation showing an employee voluntarily quit when they were terminated for cause it could cause us some problems.

When our director said everything was fine I dropped it because where else could the conversation have gone? I voiced my concerns but the decision had been made and it was determined they didn’t matter. Fine. I’m a big boy and if that’s the decision management wants to go with then I’ll just do my job within the parameters they set for me.

I didn’t think anything about the meeting until later in the afternoon when my boss contacted me to see how I was doing. I was a bit puzzled by the question because I wasn’t bothered in the least. Apparently the exchange between the director and I made several of my coworkers a bit uncomfortable, but I’m happy to say it wasn’t my behavior that caused it. The consensus seems to be that the director could have handled it a bit better.

That’s my long sordid story. My boss said they’d support me if I felt like escalating and going to our VP, but I don’t see any reason to do so. I’m going to make sure my resume is updated though.

2

A current resume sounds like a very good move. IMO, the director getting that upset about a desire for accurate personnel records is not a good sign as far as ethical (or even legal) treatment of employees.

If I understood right, this relates to a specific ex-employee, so why is this case being handled in what is apparently a non-standard manner that to me sets off “coverup” alarms?

3

I don’t have a full knowledge of the situation because I don’t handle disciplinary actions, but this isn’t being done for the puposes of covering something up. In Workday, a business process will automatically kick off a series of events. With a voluntary termination, the former employee is entitled to certain benefits that an involuntarily is not. They want to make sure this former employee receives the same benefit someone who submitted their own resignation would keep. They’re entering the false information in there so all the right things happen during the termination process. What they should do is change the policy to all employees regardless of reason for termination get the same benefits or change the process in Workday to get it to do what we want.

4

I’m not an HR professional nor an employment lawyer, but I have and do currently manage people and have worked through hirings and (unfortunately) multiple terminations for cause, and I’ll note that this is at minimum a violation of internal policy and possibly fraud which your director is knowledgable about and presumably directing others to perform. As I am sure you are aware, hiring and firing policies are determined and legally vetted specifically to protect the company from liability in case of an prejudicial termination or discrimination lawsuit, and records pertaining to employment and termination proceedings are legal documents which are used among other things to determine eligibility for unemployment, COBRA, and other benefits.

Since you are not responsible for entering or verifying the information you are not proximally culpable for errors or misinformation but you should at minimum document your knowledge and interactions with your director and manager in dated written form. If there is retaliation you will have a record of the origin, and if there are ever legal challenges you will be able to demonstrate that you questioned the policy.

I find it curious that your boss offered to “support” you in escalating to the VP level but didn’t take up the mantle themselves. This sounds like internal politics that you are wise to avoid but you might consider consulting with an employment lawyer to get their take because this storing the correct information “elsewhere” sounds shady as shit, and your director getting into a snit over your entirely reasonable query really sounds as if she knows she’s in the wrong. Unless you are actually directed to do something illegal or witness a fraudulent act you aren’t obliged to report it, but trust me when I say you don’t want to get caught up in an employment lawsuit without clear record that you are not in the wrong or else made management aware of your concerns.

Stranger

5

Entering false data is a violation of our code of conduct as we are specifically required to truthfully enter data on any business related activity which is recorded and or reported. When entering reasons for employee termination, falsification of documents is actually on the drop down menu because it’s common enough to warrant it being there. It’s actually a pretty serious violation and the code of conduct directs us to report anyone who tells you to enter false information.

I’ve made notes of the encounter with names, dates, and the conversation that transpired. The truth is that I don’t work very closely with the director and I’m not that concerned it’s going to have any effect on my career. Better safe than sorry.

My boss recently lost a battle over another issue where the information entered into Workday wasn’t accurate. There are internal politics in play not just within my department but with interdepartmental politics as well. These are problems that have been bubbling for a while. We had some turnover these last few years and data integrity was a bigger priority in the past it seems.

6

In your place, I’d take one of two approaches depending on how you feel about your job and the company.

Is it important to you that the company does the right thing and avoids potential liability? Then I’d take your boss’s offer and talk to someone higher up. SoaT is right that your boss should probably be doing the escalating instead of just supporting it, but you work with what you’ve got. In any conversation, I wouldn’t frame it as the director doing something wrong; instead you are just raising an issue, seeking input, and making suggestions for other ways to address the issue (like changing Workday flows). If the VP says that’s how things work at this company, then start sending out resumes.

On the other hand, if you get satisfaction from your role and the broader activities of the company aren’t your concern, kick back and don’t worry about it. Either approach is fine.

7

The “receives x post-employment benefits” checkbox should be decoupled from the “voluntary / involuntary termination” checkbox. Or, at the very least, a way to manually override the distinction with proper notation.

Termination records need to have the capacity to be made transparent easily because the government agency that looks into firings and unemployment eligibility will demand to see it. It’s weird to hear that any of that kind of information is being withheld from the company’s own HR people.

8

I don’t know if that I would recommend this. I’m reading between the lines but it sounds as if the o.p.’s boss has already fought a pitched battle about this and lost for unknown reasons (either the upper management either didn’t see the issue or is in agreement with the practice) and is now perhaps hoping that the o.p. will flag attention at the VP level but unwilling to carry the issue themselves. The absolutely ethical thing would be to push it up until you get a definitive answer from the director’s boss (presumably the VP) but that is also a good way to get into the middle of a fight that you actually have no influence over and can result in retaliation. If the o.p. felt inclined to do that, I’d definitely talk to an employment lawyer and get all documentation, as well as performance and disciplinary history lined up because it is really easy for HR to manufacture a case of “termination for cause” when they are so inclined, and fighting for whistleblower protections is an uphill battle even in states that have explicit statutes about it.

Stranger

9

It’s very strange. Generally speaking, the only additional benefit an employee gets from a voluntary separation versus termination is that they are (absent of any outstanding disciplinary issues or a history of malfeasance) eligible for consideration of rehire with continuance of service years (for promotion and pension vesting), whereas someone terminated for cause is often barred from being rehired or will not be credited with past employment.

I don’t know anything about Workday other than having gone through a couple of recruiting/interview/provisional offer process with it as an applicant and I got a vague impression that HR people don’t really like it very much (although I can’t see how it can be much worse than other common systems like ADP). Maybe this is just a workaround because they can’t figure out how to configure Workday to follow their processes but that seems highly problematic because the entire point of this enterprise HR management systems is to codify the formal processes and prevent anyone from deviating without a clear record and approval from higher authority. Given the primary function of HR is to protect the company from liability, entering provably fraudulent information into an auditable record system would seem to be the converse.

I’ll say that what I have learned is to try to deal with problems that I am not obliged to report without bringing HR in (i.e. minor infractions, heated differences of opinion resulting in exchange of ‘minor’ insults, ‘white lies’, et cetera), and anything that is obliged to report (personal threats, any accusation or report of harassment, clear incidence of fraud or other potentially illegal acts, et cetera) is immediately handed over to HR and I keep a detailed record of all observations and communications, including communicating everything via email (or following up phone conversations with email) even when I have been explicitly told to not use email or keep personal records.

As is probably apparent, I don’t trust HR to act in my interest as either an employee or line manager, and I certainly don’t want to get caught in a slap fight between upper management over some issue that I am not responsible for and have no control over, so that colors my opinion on such matters. In the case of the o.p., if he were interested in pushing the issue I’d definitely talk to an employment lawyer and have plans in place to look for a new position because it sounds as if the director knows what she is doing is not kosher and shutting down discussion in an aggressive fashion, and probably has the access (and lack of ethical scruples) to allow her to make a case of terminating someone who objects.

Stranger

10

Oh, I read it as the boss had a different unrelated battle. If this is the same issue at its core that the boss already fought about, then I agree that pursuing it again is unlikely to turn out well.

11

During the meeting, my boss actually did mention that it would be best to either change our policy or change the process rather than knowingly enter incorrect data into the system. But that suggestion was shot down quickly, and given the recent battle between my supervisor and director over a similar issue regarding data, it seemed unwise to press the issue further at that time. And in that other case, I know my VP was involved.

These kinds of thread are always a bit challenging. You’re only getting information from one perspective, mine, and I’m trying to keep things vague enough to protect my anonymity. No matter the reason for termination, all former employees, including this one, get what their legally entitled according to state/federal law. From a policy perspective, there are some additional monetary benefits an employee might be eligible for when they voluntarily leave the company but not when it’s an involuntary termination.

Oh, I love Workday. Most of the problems we have with Workday can be traced directly to how we initially set it up, but we’ve improved our processes over the years.

I’m not moving any deeper on this than I already have. This is something that my upper management is comfortable with and I’m just going to have to live with it. It’s not my data and it doesn’t affect how I do my job, so I’m just going to let it go like that nice cold woman told me to do a few years back.

12

Yeah, I figured there is probably more to this story that makes some kind of sense, but knowingly entering incorrect information into a formal record system, especially one governing employment records indicates a profoundly broken process or management decision even if the actual reason is benign. That your director responded so aggressively to a question instead of having a clear explanation suggests that there is some shady business, and I’m always surprised how much people high in the HR management chain do things that they know they shouldn’t do, and often don’t even effectively conceal is kind of shocking to me, but then I have a pretty jaded impression about HR in general. (But not you, @Odesio, or other HR representatives that are clearly looking out for employees’ interests and questioning suspect decisions.)

Stranger

13

There are a lot of people who dislike HR and I don’t entirely blame them. We have thousands of employers here in the United States and your experience as an employee can vary wildly depending on who your employer is. Your experience can sometimes vary wildly with the same employer depending on who your manager is. Some companies have good managers who genuinely care about the well being of their employees and others view their employees as cogs in the machine to be discarded at the first sign of difficulty. So if someone hates HR because they’ve had negative experiences in the past, I don’t blame them. Not everybody in HR is a good person.

I don’t think this is going to go anywhere any time soon. I do know my director spoke to my supervisor about me today, but I haven’t talked to my supervisor. I have an excellent relationship with my superivor and they like the director even less than I do. I’m pretty confident there won’t be any formal sanctions against me because I didn’t violate any policies. But I can’t help but feeling like I’m a target now which is no fun.

14

It sounds like the director is doing wrong and is now paranoid that you might report them. If you are being targeted as a whistle blower, you are only protected if you actually are one. It would be wise to consult a lawyer, but from where I sit, your only choice is to report the situation to the company ethics line.

15

Well, sort of. Most if all states have some provisions allowing a legal response to retaliatory harassment or firing regardless of whether the cause is ‘whistleblowing’ or not. It is, however, difficult for a single employee with limited resources to make an effective challenge, and most people don’t document their daily interactions sufficient to easily build a case, especially for an issue occurring over months or years. Performing a discrete act of making an ethics complaint does draw a documented line in the sand and may allow for invoking specific protections for whistleblowers but it isn’t as if this will prevent an employee from being fired. In reality, few if any companies have a distinct ‘ethics department’, and these complaints just get routed through HR which is awkward when the complaint is regarding HR.

The guidance to consult a lawyer specializing in employment law is spot on, and they should be willing to do a consult for free to establish whether there is a case. A retainer for something like this shouldn’t be high and probably worth it if the o.p. seriously thinks they are at risk for retaliation as a letter on law firm letterhead might be enough for somebody involved to think twice about retaliating. On the other hand, a lot of companies just seem to act like dealing with suits of this kind are a part of ‘doing business’, and rely on HR and their legal counsel to insulate them from the consequences. Given that this complaint involves a senior level HR person who presumably knows all the tricks and pratfalls of building a case for termination (although she doesn’t seem too savvy about avoiding at least the perception of unethical behavior) they might just run the calculus and decide to terminate the employee rather than address the root problem because people are really just apes whose conception of the future is fundamentally about where their next meal is coming from and legal consequences are a problem for “Future Me”.

If the o.p. does elect to consult a lawyer, don’t advertise about it with coworkers or discuss with your management. Keep a written record of interactions and a printed copy of email and electronic correspondence for your records. (With certain exceptions for proprietary information you are legally permitted to do this regardless of what HR or management tells you, and a lawyer will give you guidance on how to respond if you are ordered to hand over personal documentation of this nature.) You can always make the ethics complaint after being disciplined or terminated if you have adequate documentation to demonstrate that the action is retaliatory and especially if you have evidence that it was discussed with your management to show that you made a good faith effort to resolve the issue before reporting. Again, this may not prevent you from being fired but will give a basis for a retaliation claim, especially if the ethics (and legal) violation is as blatant as the o.p. presents it as being.

Stranger

16

That’s just it though, there’s really nothing being covered up. They’re doing this in order to avoid having to do a lot more work by changing some of our processes in the Workday HRIS. It’s laziness. It’s better for the former employee because it entitled them to a decent cash payout on their way out. And there were about a dozen of us at the meeting where this was brought up, so there are a ton of people who know about it.

It’s especially awkward because I used to handle compliance issues before moving into my new role.

If I get to that point it’s time for me to look for a new job. Not because I’m in the wrong, but because I don’t want to work for people who make my life miserable for doing my job.

17

The saga continues. Recently the director castigated several of her direct reports, speaking to them as if they were naughty children, during a staff meeting and it’s been brought to the attention of our VP. Given that we’re in the middle of an employee relations investigation from another department for similar behavior on the part of a leader, it looks like this is coming to a head. I have no idea if this will directly involve me, but typically during any kind of investigation you look into similar incidents, so I expect the VP to contact me at some point. Good times.