DS1 is a high level software engineer, working for an information technology department of a publisher.
His department (or "division") has just been purchased by a large electronics company, so he will soon be working for the new company.
When he started with his now/former employer, he read their employee handbook, and found a requirement that no cameras were allowed in the building, period, end of story.
BUT everyone has a cell phone, and all cell phones have built in cameras.
He got HR to cross out that section, at least for him.
Of course, the new owners also have an employee handbook, which DS is reading. He's an engineer, so he pays attention to EVERY DETAIL. No one else is even reading the handbook, although everyone has to sign that they've read and understand it.
His plan is to highlight every "gotcha" he comes across, and discuss them with his manager. And HR.
I'm fine with him reading it. I just don't want him to make waves, even before he gets a paycheck from the new company. I want him to discuss anything he finds with ME, but NOT with anyone else.
Part of my thought process is, everyone HAS TO SIGN, to keep their (new? old?) job. So if something eventually goes to court, because someone's been fired for violating something in the handbook (like having a cell phone in the office?) coercion can be an affirmative defense.
What do you think?
__________________
The Principle of Least Interest: He who cares least about a relationship, controls it.
Contrary to what your first instinct is, everyone does NOT have to sign. You can choose not to sign, but you will not be employed any longer. Semantics, I know, but they would tell him in court "you didn't have to sign the document. You could have said you didn't agree to our terms".
I would have him read it, and see what he finds. He may not find anything, he may find a lot he doesn't understand. Whatever he chooses to take up with HR, should be done in a friendly, "I just want to ensure I understand the policies so I can be the best employee for you that I can be" manner and not in a "gotcha! This doesn't make sense, and neither does THIS!" manner. There is a HUGE difference.
But, before going to HR directly, I would have him take his concerns to his direct supervisor. The supervisor may be able to explain things to your DS, or, take concerns directly to HR for him - possibly as a representative of the department. "Our department has a few questions about some of the things in the new handbook and I was hoping to get clarification I could take back to the team " As a supervisor, I would have preferred my direct reports come to me first, before heading to HR. This way, I could warn the employee if I thought it was not a hill worth dying on, and also so I could go to HR and set the stage for them if they insisted. A quick conversation from a supervisor to HR "John is a very diligent employee who takes details very seriously. He has some concerns about the handbook that I am sure are nothing, but he would like to set some time aside to go over his concerns. A few minutes with you would set his mind at ease. Do you have the time?" would set the tone for the HR rep who may or may not have experience with engineers.
Good luck.
__________________
Out of all the lies I have told, "just kidding" is my favorite !
Contrary to what your first instinct is, everyone does NOT have to sign. You can choose not to sign, but you will not be employed any longer. Semantics, I know, but they would tell him in court "you didn't have to sign the document. You could have said you didn't agree to our terms".
I would have him read it, and see what he finds. He may not find anything, he may find a lot he doesn't understand. Whatever he chooses to take up with HR, should be done in a friendly, "I just want to ensure I understand the policies so I can be the best employee for you that I can be" manner and not in a "gotcha! This doesn't make sense, and neither does THIS!" manner. There is a HUGE difference.
But, before going to HR directly, I would have him take his concerns to his direct supervisor. The supervisor may be able to explain things to your DS, or, take concerns directly to HR for him - possibly as a representative of the department. "Our department has a few questions about some of the things in the new handbook and I was hoping to get clarification I could take back to the team " As a supervisor, I would have preferred my direct reports come to me first, before heading to HR. This way, I could warn the employee if I thought it was not a hill worth dying on, and also so I could go to HR and set the stage for them if they insisted. A quick conversation from a supervisor to HR "John is a very diligent employee who takes details very seriously. He has some concerns about the handbook that I am sure are nothing, but he would like to set some time aside to go over his concerns. A few minutes with you would set his mind at ease. Do you have the time?" would set the tone for the HR rep who may or may not have experience with engineers.
Good luck.
This is phenomenal advice.
__________________
I'm the Ginger Rogers of spelling...that means I'm smat.
Lesson learned in February: I don't have to keep up, I just have to keep moving!
I would be willing to bet that the old company and the camera rule dating back prior to all phones having cameras, HR just didn't keep up with tech changes. Most defense contractors I visit also had this rule, operative word being "had".
__________________
Sometimes you're the windshield, and sometimes you're the bug.
